Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly. The party made this situation possible, and rest assured if Gingrich had won Florida everyone would be scrambling tout de suite to make sure it changed back to proportional delegation.
Nobody contested South Carolina being winner take all before the appropriate date? The rules were known going in, if he had an issue with it, he should have said something before.
The large reason they are trying to appeal is because it states in Florida rules that the delegates must be given proportional, Florida wasn't even suppose to hold its primary this early. The Republican committee should have been more strict with penalties on the state. This is not the first election year Florida breaks the rules.
They did penalize Florida. They took away 49 of their 100 delegates...that is pretty harsh. The rules state that you cannot levy two penalties on one state also. This is going nowhere. It would require the RNC to rule against themselves.
Last edited by dixiegirl7; 02-03-2012 at 01:05 AM..
They did penalize Florida. They took away 49 of their 50 delegates...that is pretty harsh. The rules state that you cannot levy two penalties on one state also. This is going nowhere. It would require the RNC to rule against themselves.
Correction: They took away 50 of their 100 delegates.
Two delegates does not accurately represent the percentage of the vote he got in SC. Not even close. So yes, using Newt's logic, he still has every right to complain.
Nobody said anything about it being proportional, only that it isn't winner take all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Comes down to Gingrich being a whiny little brat who will throw a tantrum when he doesn't get his way.*
If anyone would bother taking the infinitesimally small amount of time necessary to look these things up it would save a lot of stupid posts. The RNC left the rules open as to whether or not Florida can be forced to award their delegates proportionally, through a challenge filed at the state party committee meeting in August. Newt or anyone else has the right to file a challenge.
My guess would be that when the RNC re-did the rules last year they wanted to keep FL as a powerful early state to winnow the field down to get the cranks and loons out, though that was mostly done after SC. However in the case a nutbar like Gingrich or Santorum or Paul or whoever snuck through, they gave themselves the room to enforce the normal rules of proportional delegation for post April 1 states who move their primaries up so as to minimize the potential damage. If Gingrich had won, without a doubt someone would've filed a challenge to award delegates proportionally. Would you then be calling whoever did that a big crybaby? Didn't think so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dixiegirl7
Nobody contested South Carolina being winner take all before the appropriate date? The rules were known going in, if he had an issue with it, he should have said something before.
Again, SC isn't winner take all. It hasn't been for years. It takes five seconds to look this stuff up.
Last edited by box_of_zip_disks; 02-03-2012 at 02:13 AM..
If anyone would bother taking the infinitesimally small amount of time necessary to look these things up it would save a lot of stupid posts. The RNC left the rules open as to whether or not Florida can be forced to award their delegates proportionally, through a challenge filed at the state party committee meeting in August. Newt or anyone else has the right to file a challenge.
My guess would be that when the RNC re-did the rules last year they wanted to keep FL as a powerful early state to winnow the field down to get the cranks and loons out, though that was mostly done after SC. However in the case a nutbar like Gingrich or Santorum or Paul or whoever snuck through, they gave themselves the room to enforce the normal rules of proportional delegation for post April 1 states who move their primaries up so as to minimize the potential damage. If Gingrich had won, without a doubt someone would've filed a challenge to award delegates proportionally. Would you then be calling whoever did that a big crybaby? Didn't think so.
If Gingrich had won Florida, do I think that Romney, Paul and Santorum would be taking legal action?
Actually, no I don't. They all went in with the same understanding. Winner take all. Right now, only Gingrich is playing the role of Al Gore and "demanding a recount." Yes I get that it's not a recount, but the mentality is exactly the same. Digging in, refusing to admit defeat and trying to rewrite the rules of the game. It's called being a sore loser and Newt has been a sore loser in every state but South Carolina.
Santorum and Paul both called Romney to congratulate him. Gingrich did not. Instead, Gingrich tells the whole world that Romney was a big meanie and saying that his only game was negative ads and lots of money. In reality, Romney returned the favor for Newt's all-out character assassination in South Carolina. Mitt didn't whine about it, he just stepped up his own game. Gingrich can obviously dish it out, but he can't take it. Further evidence that Gingrich is being a sore loser and a spoiled sport.
Gingrich is the only one who threw a fit about his own failure to make it onto the Virginia ballot. Granted, the process should be simpler, but Santorum, Huntsman, Perry and others did not immediately demand special treatment. Newt did because Newt apparently feels that he deserves special exceptions for everything. Where is his outrage for the cases where other candidates did not get onto the ballot? When he won SC, he was smug and more or less claimed victory as the inevitable GOP nominee.
Newt is welcome to do what he feels he has to, but it's making him look like a sore loser and a spoiled sport. It does not demonstrate the kind of maturity that one needs in order to be the President of the United States.
Nobody said anything about it being proportional, only that it isn't winner take all.
If anyone would bother taking the infinitesimally small amount of time necessary to look these things up it would save a lot of stupid posts. The RNC left the rules open as to whether or not Florida can be forced to award their delegates proportionally, through a challenge filed at the state party committee meeting in August. Newt or anyone else has the right to file a challenge.
My guess would be that when the RNC re-did the rules last year they wanted to keep FL as a powerful early state to winnow the field down to get the cranks and loons out, though that was mostly done after SC. However in the case a nutbar like Gingrich or Santorum or Paul or whoever snuck through, they gave themselves the room to enforce the normal rules of proportional delegation for post April 1 states who move their primaries up so as to minimize the potential damage. If Gingrich had won, without a doubt someone would've filed a challenge to award delegates proportionally. Would you then be calling whoever did that a big crybaby? Didn't think so.
Again, SC isn't winner take all. It hasn't been for years. It takes five seconds to look this stuff up.
Actually SC is 'winner takes all' according to this article:
Quote:
How are the delegates allocated among the candidates?
South Carolina uses a “winner-take-all” system to award delegates. A candidate is awarded 11 delegates for winning the primary, plus two delegates for each congressional district won. South Carolina has seven districts beginning with the 2012 election.
Newt never ceases to amaze with his powers of idiocy.
Florida accepted a loss of half of their delegates in order to be a winner take all. Same is true of South Carolina, but oddly enough, Newt's sense of horrible injustice has not yet forced him to give proportional delegates for that state. And no you can't get on the Virginia ballot Newt. Yes by all means threaten to sue everybody. Have fun with that!
Poor Newtered. He will now
That is not exactly correct.
First off Florida accepted a loss of half their delegates to move their primary up. South Carolina was the same and New Hampshire was also the same, that was the price they had to pay for binding January contests (note Iowa avoided this because their caucus is non-binding). South Carolina and NH also did proportionally award delegates. NH was proportional by % of vote SC was proportional in that the state wide winner got some delegates and the rest were split by CD winner which is why Romney may have received some delegates for a possible win in one CD.
Florida is unique in that they violated both rules and that is the debate. It was underway long before the primary and was commented on prior to the primary by people who wrote the RNC rules including Michael Steele.
Newt crying foul about the rules yet again, after playing the game and losing. If FL GOP changes their rules to give Newt any delegates, expect Santorum and Paul to pile on. If it was going to be a proportional allocation, Paul for sure would have campaigned in the state. It's unfair to change the rules later in the game.
Nobody said anything about it being proportional, only that it isn't winner take all.
Again, SC isn't winner take all. It hasn't been for years. It takes five seconds to look this stuff up.
it certainly was a strange primary in south carolina, no matter how you look at it-just like the iowa caucus.
the state was penalized half of their delegates-so there are only 25 awarded, and 23 are pledged to newt and 2 to romney-even though the actual official voting results were
(green paper source)how that winds up being 23 to 2 in delegate count i don't know.
of course, there were thousands of votes cast for people no longer in the race so maybe it does make some kind of sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
