[emily]

They did not deliver affidavit in support of Mitt on time

An affidavit is never mentioned in the Republican Party’s rules for selecting delegates and has never been required of delegates in the past, GOP critics say.

In Massachusetts, Paul’s Liberty Slate swept the Republican caucuses in April, stealing delegate spots that were expected to go to ’s friends and allies, whom he had selected.

Some libertarian-leaning delegates balked at the notion of signing legal affidavits pledging what they had committed verbally at the caucuses where they were elected.

[rozalinasi]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

THEY ALL WANT ROMNEY TO PUMP THEIR POPOS.

FUCK 'EM.

[AffipgyncDync]

Well, fiddle-dee-dee Rhett.
I forgot the LINK.

[Gmvkgkmn]

I think this comment really hits at the heart of the reason why these people were ousted:

I'm glad to see those liars get discovered and eliminated (people who promised to vote for Mitt in order to become a delegate - but really intended on not voting the first round and then voting for Ron Paul the second round). It was shameful what they were doing. And they have the gumption to think that the process was unfair to them? That's a LOL and 1/2. I don't like it, it's the worst aspect of intra-party politics, but it's the way it is. Ron Paul supporters had their own plans and tricks up their sleeves, they just got out-smarted. The campaign does have the right to disqualify them under rather vague terms, and they exercised them. This might actually be an issue that is worth looking at if Ron Paul actually did well in any of the primaries. His team wanted to play politics, they got what they wanted. Crying about it looks weak.

[xochgtlm]

I'm a Paul fan and the R's have treated him shamefully at times.. There should be repercussions for this.

However, he didn't win the nomination.

Some sort of "coup" would be inappropriate and anti-democratic.

[alskdjreyfd]

I'm a Paul fan and the R's have treated him shamefully at times.. There should be repercussions for this.

However, he didn't win the nomination.

Some sort of "coup" would be inappropriate and anti-democratic.

It would be nice if people got serious enough about the rules to stop this kind of shit once and for all. Make them cut and dry, make them near impossible to change just-prior-to/after the election, and move on. This stuff is needlessly messy.

[gydrorway]

It would be nice if people got serious enough about the rules to stop this kind of shit once and for all. Make them cut and dry, make them near impossible to change just-prior-to/after the election, and move on. This stuff is needlessly messy.

I think the party likes it that way. Provided the PTB's can use it in their favor..

I'd like to see hard rules also.. The R's really are deficient as a party because of things like this.

Frankly, I think neither party serves American interests and deserve to be replaced with more transparent and democratic alternatives.

[Trientoriciom]

I think the party likes it that way. Provided the PTB's can use it in their favor..

I'd like to see hard rules also.. The R's really are deficient as a party because of things like this.

Frankly, I think neither party serves American interests and deserve to be replaced with more transparent and democratic alternatives.

The problem being both parties are run by people, and people have interests. The county/district level positions are often held by small people who are willing to put in the work because they like the power. If the libertarian party got bigger, they'd have the same problem. People like politics and people like power. A truly individualist party cannot exist because there aren't enough selfless people who care enough about the process to let ideas counter to theirs (or people other than who they choose) come out on top. This is politics. You can get rid of government in an attempt to remove it, but people will still band together and this kind of thing will happen again. It sucks, but there are much bigger issues to worry about.

[Controller]

I kind of see this AS the big issue.. This is how these ridiculous interests maintain their hegemony.

[lkastonidwedsrer]

It's also why nothing ever gets fixed..

[eFDMBwKH]

This is outrageous & offensive. The Establishment/status quo Repubs want the anti- fed, Dr Paul silenced.

[VotsUtegems]

This is outrageous & offensive. The Repub Establishment wants the anti- fed Dr Paul silenced.

He lost.. Despite all the flag waving hooplah, Americans have very little use for actual freedom.

[michael247]

I would even consider voting for Dr. Paul & I'm a Progressive. He wants the meddling out of the US as do I

[RuttyUttepe]

I would even consider voting for Dr. Paul & I'm a Progressive. He wants the meddling out of the US as do I

I'd vote for him because I don't think we CAN go too far in the direction of freedom and liberty.. And I know that even if it were possible, there's no danger of it becoming a permanent condition.

[Fegasderty]

Everyone kind of wants to tinker with things.. Make them favor certain constituents.. Turn some knobs and warp them a little.

I just want them GONE.

[forexsoft]

I kind of see this AS the big issue.. This is how these ridiculous interests maintain their hegemony.

But it's personal interests of people with just a little bit of power as much, if not more, than the power of wealthy interests.

[Kristoferson]

I'd vote for him because I don't think we CAN go too far in the direction of freedom and liberty.. And I know that even if it were possible, there's no danger of it becoming a permanent condition.

My fear is that he'd have to use supra-executive powers, much like Obama is doing now, to make any real change. He's come out against that. I think he'd use them anyway, because he looks like the kind of guy that would lie to himself about the power that he wields, telling himself it's not that much, non-corrupting, and that he knows what's best.

Cincinnatus is long dead and gone. Both of them.

[Misiotoagodia]

But it's personal interests of people with just a little bit of power as much, if not more, than the power of wealthy interests.

I dunno if I buy that..

We very nearly got sold into carbon slavery by huge interests and all their money..

Obamacare benefits vast interests in Pharma, Med and Ins. All very wealthy.

We got sold out on TARP to Wall Street and all their money..

We're getting draconian border checks and intrusion on the internet thanks to wealthy and vast interests primarily in Hollywood.

Our campaign finance laws and practices are a complete joke... Wealthy foreign interests would have no problem circumventing them.. DC doesn't care.

It seems to me that DC only cares about and works for interests who are wealthy..

The American people they could really care less about.

[itaspCatCriny]

My fear is that he'd have to use supra-executive powers, much like Obama is doing now, to make any real change. He's come out against that. I think he'd use them anyway, because he looks like the kind of guy that would lie to himself about the power that he wields, telling himself it's not that much, non-corrupting, and that he knows what's best.

Cincinnatus is long dead and gone. Both of them.

I don't think so.. The real problem would be when Congress bucked him.

Both parties would expose themselves as the corrupt, intertwined mess that they really are.

It would be a disaster for them not to be able to play both ends against the middle as they do currently.

[Pyuvjzwf]

I dunno if I buy that..

We very nearly got sold into carbon slavery by huge interests and all their money..

Obamacare benefits vast interests in Pharma, Med and Ins. All very wealthy.

We got sold out on TARP to Wall Street and all their money..

We're getting draconian border checks and intrusion on the internet thanks to wealthy and vast interests primarily in Hollywood.

Our campaign finance laws and practices are a complete joke... Wealthy foreign interests would have no problem circumventing them.. DC doesn't care.

It seems to me that DC only cares about and works for interests who are wealthy..

The American people they could really care less about.

I'm not talking about the bigger, overarching problems. Those are real issues, no doubt. I'm talking about the party level. Where the action happens. The lines surely blur when it comes to outside and personal interests, as many people's personal interests are influenced by outside interests. But, politics are all about interests. I'd rather open the whole fucking thing up to as much American money as people want to put in (bar any external funding), force them to document the origin of every dollar, and have at it. We're never going to get campaign finance reform that doesn't favor incumbents over those running to oust them. I'd never trust the people who could have their power put at risk to create rules that don't favor them. I don't like the idea of rules for where I can give my money anyway. And since I want to be able to give to whomever the fuck I please, whenever the fuck I please, I'd be a right hypocrite if I didn't want the same thing for every other person or group of people, no matter what their message is.

More rules never fix the problem. We should try less. Fewer rules in this case would probably have helped Paul. His strategy was to use the messy rules to take delegates at the caucuses. Simple rules would have made the whole thing transparent.