Romney nomination moved up to Monday

posted at 8:41 am on August 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

For the moment, it looks like the Republican Party has nothing to fear over Tropical Storm Isaac — but they’re taking no chances.  Instead of waiting until the third day of the convention to formally nominate Mitt Romney for President as would be customary, the roll call will take place on Monday.  It’s not just to avoid having a hurricane disrupt the convention, either:

Republican delegates will begin the roll call vote to officially nominate Mitt Romney for president on Monday at the national convention in Tampa, which could allow Romney to accept the GOP nomination earlier in the week than has occurred at previous conventions.

The formal presidential nomination process will begin earlier than past years in part because of concerns about supporters of libertarian Texas Rep. Ron Paul, Republican officials said Thursday. Officials are also discussing the impact that Tropical Storm Isaac could have on the convention.

Republican candidates have typically been nominated a day ahead of their convention speech. Roll call votes have typically begun later in the convention proceedings than will occur this year, a convention official said. Romney is slated to speak next Thursday.

The move answers the question asked by our own Steven Den Beste last night: what happens if the convention had to disband before the formal nomination takes place?  The RNC would probably have to hold a vote over the phone, but the time to make and execute those new arrangements would delay the nomination — and therefore delay the moment when Romney can start using his general-election funds.

Technically, this change makes that even better for Romney, because the campaign should be able to start tapping those funds Monday night rather than Wednesday.  Practically speaking, the extra two days make little difference, but if the GOP nomination had been delayed another week, that could have been significant.  The campaign needs to hit the airwaves heavily as soon as Romney’s voice stops echoing from the dais on Thursday night to build momentum out of the convention, and a delay in accessing the funds could have ended up wasting all of the effort from the convention.

Plus, the new arrangements have another benefit — sidelining Ron Paul:

Using a mix of charm and procedural hardball, Mitt Romney’s campaign and his allies who control the Republican National Committee have ensured that the Texas congressman will neither speak nor be formally nominated at next week’s convention. It’s a significant victory for Romney, who could have been faced with a raucous rebellion from the Paul crowd if he hadn’t extended an early, and diplomatic, olive branch to what’s become a key constituency.

The libertarian septuagenarian controls the state delegations from Nevada, Iowa and Minnesota. But a candidate needs five states to be officially recognized on the floor. Paul supporters have made claims to Louisiana, Massachusetts, Oregon, Oklahoma and Maine. But Romney’s coterie of lawyers skillfully used the rules and interpersonal negotiations to peel each away.

The 168-member Republican National Committee approved a report Thursday by the Romney-friendly “committee on contests” that invalidated Paul delegates elected in Maine based on irregularities at the state convention. The RNC voted to split the at-large delegation in half, effectively depriving Paul of control.

Paul’s supporters seem uncharacteristically sanguine about the defeat:

“We knew we were walking into a snake pit, but you’ve got to put up the fight,” said Virginia delegate Christopher Stearns, who worked closely with the Paul campaign on the convention platform and the rules. “You’ve got to have a discussion. Otherwise, it appears as though there’s nothing going on.”

“It was a fair hearing, and I thought it was an acceptable environment,” Stearns added. “The majority rules, and the will of [the] minority shall be heard. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the circumstances we have right now.”

There are two reasons for such easy acquiescence to the kind of intra-party brawling that Paul supporters usually decry, and they’re not mutually exclusive.  One is that they realize that any hint of division will throw the election to Barack Obama, and that’s worse than a defeat for Paul at the convention.  The other is that Team Romney has quietly made some significant concessions to appease Paul and send him into a happy retirement.  I’d guess that to be Rand Paul’s speaking slot and higher-than-expected profile as a Romney supporter.

So far, the news is all good for the Republican convention.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

That attitude is what I have a problem with. I found the Chick Fil-A boycott disgraceful. Silencing voices we disagree with is an old tactic of the left. I refuse to cheer lead these tactics just because I might happen to like the result this time.

You ddidn’t get “sillenced” dood…grow up and put away the Victim Suit. Your guy came in FOURTH…he got fewer delegates than Santorum. Do you see Santorum and his followers kicking and screaming? Gingriches? The only people crying about being “robbed” are the Paulbots…..

You LOST, gt over it, get used to it….I like to say “Get some votes, get some power.” You didn’t get the votes and you didn’t get any power..sorry about that. You guyz and galz are just like kids, you want it and so you think you should get it…

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:00 AM

Now I’m curious ..
Does this mean Ann’s speech is moved into a TV spot, later in the week ??
Sure hope so.

pambi on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

They *uniformly* agree that the U.S. does not have the oil reserves to make an impact on global supply. Period.

So your position is that there being MORE oil, does not affect the AMOUNT of oil in the world…you are comfortable with the logic and validity of that statement?

I’ll give you a minute to ponder what I just asked.

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Well darn. And all those years you guys were telling us it was Bush’s fault the price was so high. My how things change.

tdpwells on August 24, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Politicians lie to win elections? Knock me over with a feather. I’m going to have to listen to some Beyonce to restore my faith in humanity. Take it away B. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74tPzvY4hiQ

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 9:58 AM

Any idea what speaker changes they’re referring too?

changer1701 on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Please note: Ron Paul does not represent the broad libertarian movement. While all us libertarians love him for his economic views, his foreign policy is atrocious.

Appeasement of Islamo-Fascism is NOT libertarian. Islamists represent EVERYTHING that we libertarians oppose. Real libertarians (Geert Wilders, Pamela Geller, Dennis Miller, Nigel Farage, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Allen West), oppose Islamism.

Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul, Raimondo, Reason, and the rest are left-libertarians. They represent the far leftside of our libertarian movement.

ericdondero on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

You folks have allowed this libfreeordie troll to totally take over and dominate another thread. I don’t know why.

TarheelBen on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Did you notice that you never once said “We will talk about Mitt Romney?”

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 9:14 AM

How’s about you talk about Barack Obama? Instead of your prefabricated, predictable leftist talking points, how’s about you tell us what your sociopathic punk of a candidate has to offer for the good of this country and what he’s accomplished so far?

Please, share that with us.

Right Mover on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Politicians lie to win elections? Knock me over with a feather. I’m going to have to listen to some Beyonce to restore my faith in humanity. Take it away B. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74tPzvY4hiQ

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Not just politicians, genius. Try every pundit on the left. And every lefty I know. You guys were lapping that up like Jim Jones kool-aid.

tdpwells on August 24, 2012 at 10:04 AM

So your position is that there being MORE oil, does not affect the AMOUNT of oil in the world…you are comfortable with the logic and validity of that statement?

I’ll give you a minute to ponder what I just asked.

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I’m going to need you to ponder the implications of someone trying to reduce a *global* marketplace, which contains innumerable micro-markets within it, which responds to the shifting political, demographic and developmental trends of HUNDREDS of nations, of which the United States is only one to a very simplistic Supply-Demand inverse relationship curve. Just ponder what kind of a simpleton would think that if you can understand the most basic supply-demand relationship then you can automatically understand how the price point of a global commodity like oil functions.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM

TarheelBen on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Well let’s see we can talk about the SUBJECT, Romney’s nomination, but what is there to talk about? It’s been a done deal for months, and all the thread does is talk about when the done deal get signed…or we can discuss Romney and the election and libfree…

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM

@JFKY

Shame you can not argue the issue I am raising instead of insisting I am a Paul supporter – which I am not.

So my understanding is that you are pro dictator. If a state uses a primary method you do not support – invalidating their votes is fine.

D.L.Mc on August 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Tell us…what kind of simpletons would invite poeple who want to kill us to their Political Convention?

kingsjester on August 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Just ponder what kind of a simpleton would think that if you can understand the most basic supply-demand relationship then you can automatically understand how the price point of a global commodity like oil functions.

Because I lived thru the 1980′s…when ONE nation, Saudi Arabia, busted OPEC’s prices and production limits and INCXREASED TEH AMOUNT OF OIL IT PRODUCED…and hence REDUCED THE COST OF OIL AND PETROL.

In short you have a THEORY and I have HISTORY…plus a theory…that US production is a part of GLOBAL production, further you ignore 1) that US demand reduces because of Natural Gas,

In sum, the US increases the global supply of oil and reduces the global demand for oil….ergo, dood/doodette the price of oil drops as does the cost of petrol. And I have a historical period, recent, to demonstrate that…

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Not just politicians, genius. Try every pundit on the left.

Did you not watch Jon Stewart on Crossfire in 2004? Most pundits are merely surrogates for political strategy.

And every lefty I know.

tdpwells on August 24, 2012 at 10:04 AM

Then you either know some opportunistic jerks or fools, what can I say. Sadly, based upon the comments of conservatives regarding oil prices in the Obama administration I can now say the same.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Then you either know some opportunistic jerks or fools, what can I say.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:09 AM

I said they were liberals, didn’t I?

tdpwells on August 24, 2012 at 10:11 AM

So my understanding is that you are pro dictator.

Yes I AM pro-dictator, because I point out that your guy never carried a single voting state! Because I pointed out that he got fewer votes and delegates than Santorum…that’s it I’M PRO-DICTATOR.

Ok, you’re from The Onion, right? If you’re not, you must be 1) 13 or 2) a Paulbot or 3) both of the above.

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 10:11 AM

You folks have allowed this libfreeordie troll to totally take over and dominate another thread. I don’t know why.

TarheelBen on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Because it shines a light on the absurdity of her views, and reinforces what the left is all about.
And because I’d rather we go after the talking points of leftist nitwits on these boards than engage in “RINO”/”Mittbott”-vs.-”TruCon”/”SoCon” warfare, which gets us nowhere and should have been shelved the second the primary season ended.

Right Mover on August 24, 2012 at 10:12 AM

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM

So … no, then.

Axe on August 24, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Any idea what speaker changes they’re referring too?

changer1701 on August 24, 2012 at 10:02 AM

No, all I’m able to find out about changes in speaking is this:

Ann Romney speech may move to Tuesday

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Because I lived thru the 1980′s…when ONE nation, Saudi Arabia, busted OPEC’s prices and production limits and INCXREASED TEH AMOUNT OF OIL IT PRODUCED…and hence REDUCED THE COST OF OIL AND PETROL.

Are you actually under the impression we have Saudi Arabia like oil supplies? Saudi Arabia had already been an OPEC member for years, are you saying that our discovery of heretofore unknown Saudi Arabia style oil supplies will allow us to break into OPEC.

In short you have a THEORY THE ANALYSIS OF THE WORLD’S OIL EXPERTS WHO HAVE TRAINED THEIR ENTIRE LIVES AND ARE PAID BIG BUCKS FOR THEIR EXPERTISE ON THESE MATTERS. I have HISTORY… the uber unique instance of Saudi Arabia’s political struggles with other OPEC members 30 years ago.

Fixed it for you.

plus a theory…that US production is a part of GLOBAL production,

This is factually correct.

further you ignore 1) that US demand reduces because of Natural Gas,

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:15 AM

One is that they realize that any hint of division will throw the election to Barack Obama, and that’s worse than a defeat for Paul at the convention.

No. The election of Mitt Romney is tantamount to the election to Barack Obama; the two (to a genuine die-hard Paulite) are synonymous. I used to be in the Paul camp, and I can guaran-damn-tee you this is the thought. Nintety-nine percent would rather stage a write-in than vote for either Romney or Obama.

onetrickpony on August 24, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Oops posted too early.

plus a theory…that US production is a part of GLOBAL production,

This is factually correct. Know what else? When I pee in the ocean it joins the amount of liquid in the world’s oceans. Under your logic my stream (while admittedly heavy) is enough to change the PH of the entire globe’s oceans.

further you ignore 1) that US demand reduces because of Natural Gas,

How many Americans are driving natural gas cars again?

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:18 AM

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM

Here you go again trying to lecture here about something you know little about. Hundreds of nations? Just how many third world countries have a measurable impact on oil demand? Do you not realize that as long as the dollar remains the currency that oil is traded on that if the dollar declines (such as with the printing of more of it) then oil prices naturally go up. Ever since oil was moved from a simple supply and demand buy/sell to a commodity market flucuations have been more pronounced and prone to emotional/geopolitical stresses. Therefore the simple effect of increaseing drilling and obstruction removal on domestic exploration will impact crude markets. Now in light of your over inflated opnion of yourself I will let you off with just a slap on the wrist.

HoustonRight on August 24, 2012 at 10:19 AM

HoustonRight on August 24, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Please, don’t feed the troll, he is a kid we all laugh at, it just makes you look petty picking on a child.
Nobody listens to his posts anymore…let him rant, as I said he is just a child.

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 10:21 AM

@mattklewis A Ron Paul tribute film will be shown at the RNC Convention Tuesday night, says Romney strategist Russ Schriefer.

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:24 AM

No, all I’m able to find out about changes in speaking is this:

Ann Romney speech may move to Tuesday

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Thanks.

changer1701 on August 24, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Nobody listens to his posts anymore…let him rant, as I said he is just a child.

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 10:21 AM

I know, I know! Just a little grump this morning. Many thanks for reeling me in.

HoustonRight on August 24, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Why? I don’t see any need for any tribute being made to Paul.

Voter from WA State on August 24, 2012 at 10:25 AM

I have no idea.

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Please, don’t feed the troll, he is a kid we all laugh at, it just makes you look petty picking on a child.
Nobody listens to his posts anymore…let him rant, as I said he is just a child.

right2bright on August 24, 2012 at 10:21 AM

Condescension and infantilization. That’s a new tactic, and you’ve already tried so many. Why all the different rhetorical strategies to deligitimize someone who doesn’t matter.

Ever since oil was moved from a simple supply and demand buy/sell to a commodity market flucuations have been more pronounced and prone to emotional/geopolitical stresses

This has been my point the entire thread.

Therefore the simple effect of increaseing drilling and obstruction removal on domestic exploration will impact crude markets.

*RECORD SCRATCH*
Please do not be obtuse. Would increase domestic exploration/drilling and production “impact crude markets.” Of course. But that’s also an incredibly vague statement. Will it lead to a sustained decrease in oil prices that will fundamentally reduce the financial burden on oil dependent American households? You and I both know the answer to that question is no.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM

(BTW, a jobs report will be released the morning after Barry’s speech). So I say more power to them.

Doughboy on August 24, 2012 at 8:50 AM

*slaps forehead*

..that’s right! Thanks for reminding!

The War Planner on August 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Security concerns for RNC include Isaac, bridges

Security officials said they have learned some “activist groups” are planning to make their views known using “maritime activities,” and so they are enacting restrictions near and on the bridges during the RNC.

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Why? I don’t see any need for any tribute being made to Paul.

Voter from WA State on August 24, 2012 at 10:25 AM

I find it funny that the appeasment will happen after Romney is officially nominated. The question is, will it have any impact?

Snakiis on August 24, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Seems like a real waste of time.

Voter from WA State on August 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Just saw this:

Tampa, Florida (CNN) – Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign said Friday that they plan to air a video tribute to Rep. Ron Paul, his former Republican primary rival, during the second night of the Republican National Convention.

The olive branch from the Romney team comes after months of grassroots organizing by Paul’s fiercely loyal supporters, some of whom had hoped to nominate the libertarian-leaning congressman on the convention floor.

In a briefing with reporters, a Romney adviser said the Paul tribute on Tuesday will feature “several of his colleagues” who will “give testimony to his principles and his dedication to America.” Source

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Except that no one in the Democrat Media has said “Republican” without following it with “Todd Akin” in the past week. But other than that, this is a great lead-in to the convention…..

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Fixed.

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Wow libfree. Look how fast your little Akin talking point fell off the radar even on this thread. Seems like even you can’t be distracted from actual issues by that shiny object for long.

I sure hope the abortion pep rally proves a better squirrel for you guys. I’d hate for your side to have to focus on Obama’s record or his actual second term agenda. Everyone knows that you can’t win talking about Obama.

Ampersand on August 24, 2012 at 10:39 AM

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Love your screen name. We should all strive to be lib free or die.

eyedoc on August 24, 2012 at 9:04 AM

If libfree actually bothered to research the life and words of the guy who actually uttered those words (General John Stark), she would drop that screen name like a hot potato(e).

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:40 AM

It is amusing to watch just how many rules the GOP will bend to get this moron across the finishing line.

promachus on August 24, 2012 at 9:14 AM

O’bama thanks you for your support, and for your vote.

A+++

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:42 AM

If you can somehow convince any undecided voters that the GOP is less corrupt than the Democrats than you truly are light weavers.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 9:14 AM

We all know of the numerous examples of Democrat Corruption. Can you enlighten us with an equal number of equally bad Republican corruption? Names and charges, please.

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Paul supporters did the hard work and got out his supporters in the primaries. To have that all wiped out by backroom deals and rule twisting is disgraceful. I understand that Paul supporters could have provided the media with extra fodder, but this solution is nothing to be proud of.

D.L.Mc on August 24, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Why not? It was a negotiated solution. Both parts made concessions. What exactly would be a solution you’d be proud of?

joana on August 24, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Must have missed something. Since when does 4th place give one any GD benefits ? Lets keep our eye on the real prize.

democratsarefools on August 24, 2012 at 10:45 AM

We all know of the numerous examples of Democrat Corruption. Can you enlighten us with an equal number of equally bad Republican corruption? Names and charges, please.

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:44 AM

That nasty creature is a concern troll. It doesn’t actually do anything but post the latest talking points from the DNC. That’s why it is still talking about Akin and nothing substantive like jobs or the economy.

Happy Nomad on August 24, 2012 at 10:48 AM

No problem with Ron Paul being marginalized at the convention–he is perennially the Republican presidential candidate who agrees most with Democrats. But will there be speaking slots for other primary candidates who did win more than three states, particularly Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich?

Steve Z on August 24, 2012 at 10:48 AM

o the shifting political, demographic and developmental trends of HUNDREDS of nations

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM

“Hundreds of nations”, Gracie?

According to the U.N. and the US State Department, there are between 193 (U.N.) and 195 (State) countries in the world. Where in the getalife did you learn that there are “hundreds of nations”? Clown College, right?

F-

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Oops posted too early.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:18 AM

You always do.

A+++

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Happy Nomad on August 24, 2012 at 10:48 AM

He.

It’s come up a couple of times. For sure.

He.

Though “It” works and everything. Just clarifying.

Axe on August 24, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Where in the getalife did you learn that there are “hundreds of nations”? Clown College, right?

F-

Del Dolemonte on August 24, 2012 at 10:54 AM

The Diane Sawyer School of World Facts. Except the professor wasn’t paying attention the day Sawyer taught this:

Diane Sawyer: Occupy Wall Street Protests Have ‘Spread to More Than a Thousand Countries’

Flora Duh on August 24, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Congratulations RNC and Mittens. Was thinking of swallowing hard and voting for Mittens over energy plans and some of Ryan’s recent remarks. I’m a Virginia voter. But I am most definitely voting for Gary Johnson now. These tactics make me sick; it’s only all about whose cronies are in power for the next 4 years.

Firefly_76 on August 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Why? I don’t see any need for any tribute being made to Paul.

Voter from WA State on August 24, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Trying to garner the coveted anti-semite vote /

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 11:13 AM

But I am most definitely voting for Gary Johnson now. These tactics make me sick; it’s only all about whose cronies are in power for the next 4 years.

Firefly_76 on August 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Obama thanks you. Who’s Gary Johnson?

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 11:15 AM

OT, but ..
I’m extremely excited that R&R will be campaigning in Michigan today.
16 EVotes, UE rate = 9%, avg gas price $3.90/gal, foreclosure rate = 1 of every 529 units (ranks 8th, nationally), Mitt’s 3rd visit (Preezy=none since campaign started), Fox poll = R&R 45%, Obama/Biden 44% (likely voters).

Just quoting stats as I watch FNC

Go R&R in my home state !!

Carry on.

pambi on August 24, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Please do not be obtuse. Would increase domestic exploration/drilling and production “impact crude markets.” Of course. But that’s also an incredibly vague statement. Will it lead to a sustained decrease in oil prices that will fundamentally reduce the financial burden on oil dependent American households? You and I both know the answer to that question is no.

libfreeordie on August 24, 2012 at 10:28 AM

Increasing drilling has no impact on the US economy either, just ask North Dakotans…oh wait.

Question. Do you think that the burger-flipper that starts at Burger King getting paid $18/hour in Dickenson ND has trouble affording gasoline? Even if an increase in domestic supply didn’t bring down prices, which it does, increasing drilling creates new economic opportunity for rough necks and burger flippers alike. The impact goes far beyond just the oil industry.

The higher oil prices rise, the MORE money our country and citizens can make by drilling.

weaselyone on August 24, 2012 at 11:23 AM

Congratulations RNC and Mittens. Was thinking of swallowing hard and voting for Mittens over energy plans and some of Ryan’s recent remarks. I’m a Virginia voter. But I am most definitely voting for Gary Johnson now. These tactics make me sick; it’s only all about whose cronies are in power for the next 4 years.

Well OF COURSE, the guy who came in FOURTH needs to have all sorts of stroking and special privileges…Paulbots do lack a sense of self-awareness, they are clueless.

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 11:24 AM

But I am most definitely voting for Gary Johnson now. These tactics make me sick; it’s only all about whose cronies are in power for the next 4 years.

Firefly_76 on August 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Yes, Gary Johnson’s cronies will not be in power for the next 4 years. I think we have established that.

weaselyone on August 24, 2012 at 11:25 AM

This Akin thing will have a short shelf live. Akin didn’t actually rape anyone, so two weeks from now this will be a none issue.

Kjeil on August 24, 2012 at 11:39 AM

The Paul supporters are no where to be seen to work for your local republican candidates, or to even participate in other ways, like actually running themselves, say, for local town offices. Do you think Ron Paul could say something about this? they are groupies only, not interested in making calls for your low level candidate or anything, they have one track minds, and think they are above other people.

Paul needs to give them instructions.

Fleuries on August 24, 2012 at 12:24 PM

Paulbots do lack a sense of self-awareness, they are clueless.

JFKY on August 24, 2012 at 11:24 AM

I enjoy seeing comments like this coming from people who think that the most important goal this year is to “get rid of Obama” by…replacing him with Obama(R).

It will be amusing to watch the weeping and gnashing of teeth of those unable to see that a President Romney will be four years of “Judge Roberts-style” backstabbing.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 12:39 PM

The Paul supporters are no where to be seen to work for your local republican candidates, or to even participate in other ways, like actually running themselves, say, for local town offices.

I think you missed out on something that happened this election cycle. The Ron Paul supporters infiltrated the GOP Party apparatus, getting themselves elected to the local and state party leadership in many cases. I, myself was elected to the county GOP leadership committee.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Congratulations RNC and Mittens. Was thinking of swallowing hard and voting for Mittens over energy plans and some of Ryan’s recent remarks. I’m a Virginia voter. But I am most definitely voting for Gary Johnson now. These tactics make me sick; it’s only all about whose cronies are in power for the next 4 years.

Firefly_76 on August 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Yeah…right…sure…I REALLY believe you were…damn, you Paulbots are soooo butt-hurt that you are willing to throw your country under the bus…

lovingmyUSA on August 24, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Can they use this as an excuse to cancel Huckleberry’s speech as well?

slickwillie2001 on August 24, 2012 at 1:02 PM

If Romney wins, it means that Obama’s policies still (for the most part) get implemented, and that he will be the second American in history to win two non-consecutive terms.

Romney will be an unmitigated disaster as a President, because he proposes the same policies as Obama. He’s clueless on the economy, however brilliant a businessman he might have been. He thinks that cutting gov’t spending (which invariably wastes resources that could be used for productive purposes) will “hurt the economy”. He may cut taxes, but they’ll be tax cuts targeted to “increase consumer spending” or some nonsensical Keynesian reason like that. He’ll still support the corporate welfare state, including the policy of perpetual war against third-world natons that have no nukes. Unemployment will remain in the 8% to 9% range, because Romney is as much a corporatist as Obama, and will feel the pressur to give bailout money to huge, mismanaged companies in order to “save jobs”. He’ll then start messing with China, trying to get it to keep its currency strong while he pushes a policy of a further weakening of the U.S. Dollar to “help exports”. He’ll give all sorts of talks about how Obamacare needs to be repealed, then change that message to how Obamacare just needs to be improved, and implement rules changes that will be even more fiddly and expensive, until the FedGov finally says, “Screw it; we’re doing ‘single payer system’ from now on.” Romney will accelerate the militarization of the police, and the unConstitutional imprisonment of Americans (or, at least, their committment of small government types to the psycho-ward), which perhaps will at least shake the Left from their hypocritical silence on the subject. Later in his term, he’ll start floating the idea that the GOP needs to start compromising on social issues; that we need a “new dialogue on abortion and same-sex marriage”.

During all this time, there will be story after story in the news comparing Romney unfavorably to Obama, so that when 2016 rolls around Obama will once again be the Democrat candidate and get himself re-elected, and, “surprise!” Obama is, politically speaking, about to begin his third term.

So, if you vote Romney, Obama thanks you.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 1:06 PM

During all this time, there will be story after story in the news comparing Romney unfavorably to Obama, so that when 2016 rolls around Obama will once again be the Democrat candidate and get himself re-elected, and, “surprise!” Obama is, politically speaking, about to begin his third term.

So, if you vote Romney, Obama thanks you.

So interesting radical argument, no doubt. I particularly liked the part where you strawmanned many of Romney’s position. And, I think that might be the first time I’ve ever heard Cutting Taxes and Spending to promote Domestic GDP called “Keynesian Principles” so props for that

Snakiis on August 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

So, if you vote Romney, Obama thanks you.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 1:06 PM

duh duh duh duh my waffle!

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM

And, I think that might be the first time I’ve ever heard Cutting Taxes and Spending to promote Domestic GDP called “Keynesian Principles” so props for that

Snakiis on August 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I’m glad to be of service. Romney said that cutting government spending would hurt the economy, which shows a Keynesian bias to his thinking.

“Tax cuts” such as a payroll tax cut or anything said to “get money into consumers’ pockets” is very much based in Keynesian theory.

True tax cuts reduce the tax burden for producers, which creates an incentive to increase production. Payroll tax cuts only incentivize increased consumption, which, without some sort of increase in production, will result in increased prices of those items that consumers wish to purchase. As an aside, lowering tax rates while simultaneously “closing loopholes” can actually result in an increase in the tax burden.

Romney is opposed to any sort of tax reform, which was also his stance in 2008. He’s happy with the current byzantine system we call a tax code; he just thinks that rates need to be a little lower.

Romney is not a conservative, either in the economic sphere nor the social issues sphere.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 1:59 PM

duh duh duh duh my waffle!

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 1:57 PM

And Obama thanks you, too.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 2:00 PM

The reason the RNC and Romney are so afraid of Ron Paul supporters is because they actually learned the rules and were following them. Could you imagine what they could have accomplished at the convention if everyone else followed the rules as well? It was unthinkable for them to let RP supporters take the nomination out from under them after they have spent so much time, effort, and money on Romney, so they broke their own rules to prevent it from happening.

At least it will be one lowlife cheat up against another lowlife cheat so maybe they will even things out.

Hmmm, I wonder if that was one of the reasons they chose Romney in the first place, he was willing to be the sleazy person they needed to attempt to defeat Obama.

cmc on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

The reason the RNC and Romney are so afraid of Ron Paul supporters is because they actually learned the rules and were following them.

cmc on August 24, 2012 at 2:34 PM

This. For all the talk about “Paulbots” being “stupid, dope-smoking, conspiracy-theorist sheep”, we were the only group outside the leadership establishment that knew how the election was actually being conducted. The votes in the primaries were only so much garbage–based on the RNC’s own rules. It was the garnering of delegates that mattered, and delegates were chosen based on who was willing to show up at the precinct and county conventions/caucuses. I was chosen as an alternate in our precinct convention at which only ten people showed up. At the county convention, I was elected to the county party’s executive committee.

We’re not the ignorant ones.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM

For all the talk about “Paulbots” being “stupid, dope-smoking, conspiracy-theorist sheep”…

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Don’t forget joo haters

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Can they use this as an excuse to cancel Huckleberry’s speech as well?

slickwillie2001 on August 24, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Yes, very good point that hasn’t been picked up. Once Mitt has the nomination, nobody’s going to give a damm about Huck’s eulogy on Akin and his whinings.

Ozwitch on August 24, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Please note: Ron Paul does not represent the broad libertarian movement. While all us libertarians love him for his economic views, his foreign policy is atrocious.

Appeasement of Islamo-Fascism is NOT libertarian. Islamists represent EVERYTHING that we libertarians oppose. …

ericdondero on August 24, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Thank you for saying that! I could not support Ron Paul for President for that very reason.

However, I wish, wish, wish Romney would tap him for U.S. Treasury Secretary.

Mary in LA on August 24, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Promachus, cmc, cavalier, et al.: How would you feel about Ron Paul for Treasury Secretary? Don’t you think he would kick butt and take names there? I sure do.

Mary in LA on August 24, 2012 at 6:57 PM

I enjoy seeing comments like this coming from people who think that the most important goal this year is to “get rid of Obama” by…replacing him with Obama(R).

It will be amusing to watch the weeping and gnashing of teeth of those unable to see that a President Romney will be four years of “Judge Roberts-style” backstabbing.

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 12:39 PM

Yeah, amusing until you realize that we’re on the same sinking ship as the disillusioned Tea Partiers and there aren’t any lifeboats. I for one won’t be laughing.

For all the talk about “Paulbots” being “stupid, dope-smoking, conspiracy-theorist sheep”…

cavalier973 on August 24, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Don’t forget joo haters

Buttercup on August 24, 2012 at 4:08 PM

And don’t forget our supposed superiors haven’t even managed to significantly slow down the liberal agenda, much less turn it back.

Promachus, cmc, cavalier, et al.: How would you feel about Ron Paul for Treasury Secretary? Don’t you think he would kick butt and take names there? I sure do.

Mary in LA on August 24, 2012 at 6:57 PM

If you’ve got a way to get him past the Permawar Brigade, I’d be all for it. He WOULD kick butt and take names, and a silver medal is a d@mn sight better than nothing.

MelonCollie on August 24, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 2