Talk Elections

Election Archive => 2012 Elections => Topic started by: Joe Republic on May 11, 2012, 02:22:19 PM



Title: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Joe Republic on May 11, 2012, 02:22:19 PM
I've somehow been added to the mailing list for some libertarian Republican newsletter based in Nevada.  The author, Chuck Muth, was at the state convention last weekend, and his report actually made for quite a fascinating read (if you have the time and the inclination).  Especially since Muth is very much a libertarian himself, and yet even he clearly got sick of the Paultards' shenanigans.

Anyway, enjoy:

Quote
NEVADA GOP CONVENTION: DISPATCH FROM THE FRONT

I know revolutions can be ugly, but the theater of the absurd on display yesterday at the Nevada Republican Party convention in beautiful, downtown Sparks, Nevada took banal inanity to the extreme.  Indeed, even a poor, innocent hotdog vendor became a casualty of the Russell Crowe Convention…where the Ron Paul-aligned delegates insisted on fighting over EVERYTHING.

Loudly.  Often angrily.

Indeed, one of the first orders of business was forcing a vote on removing the convention chairman who they had already voted to elect to oversee the scrum.  Somehow the motion failed…perhaps some of the Ron Paul folks realized that if they got rid of this convention chair, no one else would be insane enough to agree to replace him.

Seriously, even the most innocuous, meaningless, inane matters were challenged by pointless “points of order,” points of inquiry” and even some newly-discovered “points of interests.”  It was Mike Weber on steroids.

Longtime convention attendees know Mr. Weber for his insufferable soapbox grandstanding over arcane Robert’s Rules and absurd interpretations of the party’s bylaws.

Wanna know just how bad things were yesterday?  Weber was, comparatively speaking, a voice of reason and moderation.  He was a piker compared the newly-minted Pauliamentarian wannabes who showed up en masse to force their will upon the Romney-led establishment GOP.

But here’s the thing: On the occasional substantive challenge, the Paul folks were in the right.

And they won.

For example, for some reason the convention organizers neglected to set aside an area where guests and other non-delegates would be separate from those actually credentialed to participate.  The legitimate point was raised that guests seated among delegates could participate in voicing “ayes” and “nays” without anyone knowing it.

In fact, that issue was at the root of some three hours worth of arguments, objections, yelling and shouting over what should have been the simple process of determining the official number of credentialed delegates who would be allowed to participate, you know, officially.

To his credit, new GOP Chairman Michael McDonald  - who has been on the job for all of 13 days and essentially has nothing official to do with the convention – insisted on recessing the meeting for lunch and clearing the room so that the credential dispute could be resolved away from the microphones and angry hordes.

And that’s when the hotdog vendor got it.

Down in the sports bar a very nice woman was selling hotdogs and a cup of Coke for $2.50. She was pouring the cups of Coke from 16 oz. bottles.  Well, this guy decked out head-to-toe in Ron Paul apparel, buttons and stickers decided that the $2.50 should include the WHOLE bottle of Coke, not just a cup of Coke and made a huge stink over it, much to the consternation of the rest of us starving souls in line.

I thought the poor lady was ready to clock him with the relish bucket. Some people, I guess, just can’t help being jerks.

Anyway, by the time the convention reconvened, security at the doors had been tightened and guests were corralled in a pen set up in the back of the room next to the media table. And with the official credentialing out of the way, it was time to adopt the official rules for the convention.

Rules?  What rules? We don’t need no stinkin’ rules!

Another 2 to 3 hours of stupid, ridiculous, inane, meaningless arguments, objections and points of order - often by people who would make a braying jackass look like a Miss Manners Sunday school girl.

With the avoidable and unnecessary pain and agony over who the official participants were, where the bystanders were to be sequestered, and the rules by which the Butch Cassidy Republicans and Harvey Logan Republicans would fight under settled, it was game on.

The most entertaining – actually, the ONLY entertaining aspect of the entire meeting, was watching Republican National Committeewoman Heidi Smith metaphorically dousing herself with a 55-gallon drum of gasoline and flicking her Bic.

It was vintage Heidi Smith.  “If I can’t have these mashed potatoes, nobody can.  So let me burn the village down to save it.”

Smith, of Washoe County, was being challenged by Carol Del Carlo of Washoe County and Dianna Orrock of Clark County.  And she has been a friendly, if not loyal, supporter of the Ron Paul folks for the past four years.  As such, I suspect she assumed she would have their backing.

She assumed wrong…and it quickly became apparent that the Paul crowd’s pick was Orrock.

So in her re-election campaign speech, Smith threw Paul under the bus; telling the gathered gaggle that Mitt Romney was the only way to defeat Barack Obama (“that damned socialist!”), and even went so far as to hold up a Mitt Romney sign before sitting down to a chorus of boos.

It was a thing of beauty to behold.  I mean, you do not get to witness a political suicide in person and in real time every day.

But what made Smith’s performance even more interesting was the fact that while stabbing the Ron Paul folks in the back, she inadvertently (or maybe advertently) stabbed Republican National Committeeman Bob List, who was being challenged by Interim party chief James Smack, in the heart.  And here’s where those pesky rules come into play and why they are often argued in such life-and-death terms.

According to the party’s bylaws, the state’s National Committeewoman and National Committeeman cannot come from the same county.  In addition, the bylaws stipulate that at this year’s convention the election for the National Committeewoman would take place before the election of the National Committeeman.

List is from Clark County.  And in poking the Paul folks in the eye, Smith pretty much assured that Orrock would win more than the 50%-plus-one needed to avoid a run-off with Del Carlo.  As such, if Orrock was elected List would become ineligible under party rules no matter how the voting turned out.

When the smoke cleared and the balloting completed (another major-league fuster-cluck in and of itself), Orrock had indeed won by a large majority.  And even though List then became ineligible, the inevitable fight over his eligibility became moot after Smack also smoked List by a large margin.

The Ron Paul insurgents had taken on the establishment and won.  Handily.  Smith: KIA.  List: KIA.  Mission accomplished.

Alas, the war dragged on.  For some insane reason, the convention organizers neglected to print up ballots for the national convention delegate race in advance…even though they were using BLANK BALLOTS.

Making matters worse, the hotel printer being used to print the ballots that should have been printed well in advance…broke.

But at least there was a silver lining to this particular SNAFU.  Since nothing could be done until new ballots were somehow printed up, some of us were able to retire to the bar and watch the entire Floyd Mayweather/Miguel Cotto fight…in which real blood was spilled!

Somewhere around the nine o’clock hour, the convention was called back into session with the balloting for national delegates completed.  Exhausted from a day of mind-numbing absurdity, a motion was made to recess the convention until the next morning.  The Ron Paul army was having none of it.  Motion crushed.  Onward.

What transpired next was a pointless, meaningless, unnecessary and ridiculously absurd fight over a pair of bylaws changes that had actually been proposed in the previous convention but had not been voted upon.

Now here’s just how stupid this whole entire exercise became:

After considerable debate, discussion and argument over the pair of minor changes – one simply required that the minutes from party meetings be made available to members (duh) – both measures were approved separately and individually with nary a dissenting vote from either camp.

At which point some numbnut decided the rules required that the pair of changes be approved together in the form of a vote to approve the report of the Bylaws Committee which put forward the changes that had just been approved.

So a motion was made to adopt the report which contained the two minor changes which had just been pretty much unanimously approved.  Piece of cake, right?  Nothing to see here.  Move along.

Wrong.

“All those in favor of adopting the report say aye.”

“Aye!”

“All those opposed say nay.”

“Nay!”

“The ayes have it.”

“Mr. Chairman, I call for a division of the house.”

At which point the chair asked all those in favor to stand.

“Thank you.”

“Now all those opposed stand.  Thank you.”

The ayes have it.”

“Mr. Chairman, I call for an actual count.”

“Shoot him!!” (That was me; I couldn’t help myself)

But you know, the guy was right.

It was the *opinion* of the chair that the ayes had it in the voice vote. And it was the *opinion* of the same chair that the ayes had it in the visual division of the house.  But it was close either way and the only way to know definitely and objectively was to conduct an actual head count.

And many, many MANY minutes later the count showed that indeed, the nays, not the ayes, had prevailed.

Another Paul victory.  But for what?

The bottom line result: The Paul folks successfully voted down the approval of a report including nothing more than just the two minor changes they had already voted in favor of.

It was now pushing midnight.  My head hurts.  I need a drink.

Mercifully, the chief Ron Paul organizer decided that midnight was, in fact, late enough, and made a motion to recess until 9:00 a.m. Sunday morning.  With no debate, the body agreed.  So the circus doors are now re-opened…and like the masochist I am, I’m heading down for a couple more hours of abuse as the most contentious matters finally take the stage:

Platform and Resolutions.

Does anyone know where that Bloody Mary bar is?


UPDATE: Before heading down to the convention, I just heard the Paul folks have captured 22 of the state's delegates. Romney's forces managed to win just 3 seats.  Long live the insurgency!


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Oakvale on May 11, 2012, 02:34:54 PM
I highly reccomend reading the Ron Paul forums for giggles if you find mass delusion entertaining.

Sample post -

Quote
But we don't want anyone to get too comfortable......We Could Still Loose ! Keep pushing for the WIN!


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on May 11, 2012, 04:58:02 PM
This is par for the course for the Ron Paul movement.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: argentarius on May 11, 2012, 05:03:24 PM
How far did you get as a delegate Joe? Did they expose you as a RINO?


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Frozen Sky Ever Why on May 11, 2012, 05:45:36 PM
Disgusting. More selective "Liberty" from the tin foil hat club.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on May 11, 2012, 07:26:13 PM
Joe, it's your chance of becoming a RNC delegate.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Joe Republic on May 11, 2012, 07:33:56 PM
How far did you get as a delegate Joe? Did they expose you as a RINO?

I didn't even bother going to the county convention.  I couldn't justify donating the necessary $40, or indeed any money at all, to the Republican Party.  Plus, I didn't get the time off work either.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: MyRescueKittehRocks on May 11, 2012, 07:49:49 PM
Hopefully the Paulites can pull some platform stuff in Indiana.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: I spent the winter writing songs about getting better on May 11, 2012, 10:08:16 PM
This is so f**king awesome. Those Paulites have my utmost respect. Keep up the good work in making life a living hell for the Republicans!


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: King on May 11, 2012, 10:23:55 PM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on May 12, 2012, 12:44:44 AM
Hopefully the Paulites can pull some platform stuff in Indiana.

Hopefully you can leave this forum.

I know, chances of you leaving are as slim as Paultards being relevant.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: All Along The Watchtower on May 12, 2012, 11:03:22 AM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.

SOUND MONETARY POLICY


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Donerail on May 12, 2012, 01:42:54 PM
Excellent. Seems like Nevada, for one, now has a sane GOP.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Reluctant Republican on May 12, 2012, 01:57:51 PM
I'm a big Paul supporter, but this behavior will only hurt us in the long run. Imagine the outcry if Paul had won all of the popular votes in these states and was now being shut out of delegates or influence. There would be RIOTS.

Even if the strategy somehow worked, giving the nomination to the man who was 4th in total votes received during the primary would produce such a backlash that it would ultimately hurt the movement, and probably hurt all non establishment approved campaigns in the future. Is it worth the risk?






Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Yelnoc on May 12, 2012, 02:33:15 PM
Excellent. Seems like Nevada, for one, now has a sane GOP.
Did you even read the OP?


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: LastVoter on May 12, 2012, 02:42:33 PM
This is so f**king awesome. Those Paulites have my utmost respect. Keep up the good work in making life a living hell for the Republicans!


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: MyRescueKittehRocks on May 12, 2012, 02:53:48 PM
Hopefully the Paulites can pull some platform stuff in Indiana.

Hopefully you can leave this forum.

I know, chances of you leaving are as slim as Paultards being relevant.

We are more relevant than you think. It's Paulites not Paultards.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Purch on May 12, 2012, 03:39:05 PM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.

Right but Republicans who scream that cutting taxes is the end all to all of America's problems CLEARLY Have a great understanding of how the goverment works. Along with democrats who claim rasing taxing on the rich fixes all our problems.

But of course the group of people who just speak about being finacially stable and decreasing our military budget are the ones who have no idea how the goverment works. Clearly the people who understand that are current investments both overseas and domestically are the crazy ones.




Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Zioneer on May 12, 2012, 11:04:46 PM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.

Right but Republicans who scream that cutting taxes is the end all to all of America's problems CLEARLY Have a great understanding of how the goverment works. Along with democrats who claim rasing taxing on the rich fixes all our problems.

But of course the group of people who just speak about being finacially stable and decreasing our military budget are the ones who have no idea how the goverment works. Clearly the people who understand that are current investments both overseas and domestically are the crazy ones.




But that's unfair; there's plenty of Democrats that want to reduce military spending, and the last surplus we had was under a present that raised taxes, cut spending, and (after the Balkan mess) reduced the amount of military adventures the US was involved in.

You've got to have a combination of all three, you can't just have reduced spending. Gutting social programs would wreak havoc on... pretty much everything.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: tpfkaw on May 12, 2012, 11:20:39 PM

haha

Quote
cut spending,

lol!

Quote
reduced the amount of military adventures the US was involved in.

You really are a card, aren't you!


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Atlas Has Shrugged on May 12, 2012, 11:28:09 PM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Purch on May 13, 2012, 07:51:40 AM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.

Right but Republicans who scream that cutting taxes is the end all to all of America's problems CLEARLY Have a great understanding of how the goverment works. Along with democrats who claim rasing taxing on the rich fixes all our problems.

But of course the group of people who just speak about being finacially stable and decreasing our military budget are the ones who have no idea how the goverment works. Clearly the people who understand that are current investments both overseas and domestically are the crazy ones.




But that's unfair; there's plenty of Democrats that want to reduce military spending, and the last surplus we had was under a present that raised taxes, cut spending, and (after the Balkan mess) reduced the amount of military adventures the US was involved in.

You've got to have a combination of all three, you can't just have reduced spending. Gutting social programs would wreak havoc on... pretty much everything.

I hope you're not referring to the president who bombed that crap out of Iraq and Afghanistan during his impeachment.

But yes it has to be a combination. Which is why Simpson-Bowles actually looked like a light at the end of a dim tunnel. But Obama didn't push it through when he needed to , Paul Ryan backed away from it and we continue down a cliff.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P! on May 14, 2012, 03:27:25 PM
Paultards need to find out the hard way that government ain't as easy they think.

Right but Republicans who scream that cutting taxes is the end all to all of America's problems CLEARLY Have a great understanding of how the goverment works. Along with democrats who claim rasing taxing on the rich fixes all our problems.

But of course the group of people who just speak about being finacially stable and decreasing our military budget are the ones who have no idea how the goverment works. Clearly the people who understand that are current investments both overseas and domestically are the crazy ones.




But that's unfair; there's plenty of Democrats that want to reduce military spending, and the last surplus we had was under a present that raised taxes, cut spending, and (after the Balkan mess) reduced the amount of military adventures the US was involved in.

You've got to have a combination of all three, you can't just have reduced spending. Gutting social programs would wreak havoc on... pretty much everything.

The "last surplus" was funded by looting Social Security for extra cash and shuffling around the money to give the appearance of being in the black. Not jacking up spending certainly helped, but it was a rather cheap monetary trick that can only work once in a while.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Donerail on May 14, 2012, 08:43:59 PM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: I spent the winter writing songs about getting better on May 14, 2012, 10:24:28 PM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)

A Democrat who likes Paul? You might like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9pXlxkomQ


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Donerail on May 14, 2012, 10:28:44 PM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)

A Democrat who likes Paul? You might like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9pXlxkomQ

I saw it when you posted it earlier, actually, and I did indeed like (and Liked) it.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Reluctant Republican on May 14, 2012, 10:39:10 PM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)

That's what I wonder. Even at the Paul forums, Rand's recent comments on Obama and gays  [Stupid but overblown, in my view] have really looked like they've turned a lot of people off on him. There's a big divide between the social liberals and social conservatives in the movement, and Rand is not looking like he'll be able to bridge that to the same extent that his father did.  I think he runs the risk of being seen as just another Republican to the young when he runs in 2016, and those were a big part of Ron's activist base. 

I mostly like Rand and he's my first choice in 2016, but he did not do himself any favors with this one.


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: Rules for me, but not for thee on May 15, 2012, 12:42:41 AM
Not this Paulite.

Ron: ()

Rand: ()

CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)


Title: Re: How the Paultards stole Nevada
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on May 15, 2012, 12:45:56 AM
CONSPIRACY ALERT: I think the Paulite takeovers MAY have been facilitated by Rand to advance his own career, even if it makes his father look bad. The base for a potential Rand Paul campaign in 2016 will be much stronger.

Seems possible, but will the Paulites turn out for Rand? I, for one, like the father but don't really like the son (he seems too neoconny for me...)

A Democrat who likes Paul? You might like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9pXlxkomQ

Would have been better if it didn't say Berlin on the map.