Ron Paul Nevada Delegates Voted for McCain Too
Posted on September 7th, 2008 by laur Tags: Chris Blanc, Chris Bunce, Chris Dyer, delegates, G.O.P., John McCain, Ken Harwood, Massachusetts, Nevada, nevada delegates, Republican Party, RNC, Ron Paul, Ron Paul NevadaWrites Ken Harwood: “As you know:
“About a dozen Massachusetts supporters of the Texas Congressman and GOP upstart decided to back McCain only an hour before the delegates began to cast votes for the presidential pick.“We decided the best course of action was to give a little to get a lot,” said Chris Blanc, a Cambridge resident who supports Paul. “The Massachusetts GOP really wanted to show unanimous support.”
“The four Ron Paul Nevada delegates all voted for John McCain, too. Then they claimed victory: we showed them that they can’t take us for granted.
“Huh? Mass madness.
“One of those four had even solicited (& received) donations from the Las Vegas RP Meetup Group to help pay her way to St. Paul.”
Washington — In the end, the revolution would be fought from within.
Nevada’s loyal supporters of one-time presidential hopeful Ron Paul, who pushed so hard for a seat at the table at the Republican National Convention, decided when their moment arrived last week to break bread rather than dishes.
On the third night of the convention, when the state Republican Party chairman stood in the hall and announced Nevada would be casting all of its 34 delegates for Sen. John McCain, it was because the Paul supporters made it so.
Paul delegate Chris Bunce said Friday they decided not to spoil the party. Bunce knew Republicans from Nevada, a swing state this election year, wanted desperately to present a unified front for McCain.
The Paul supporters had to decide — make a point or make peace?
Their few votes would not bring the congressman’s suspended campaign for the presidency any closer to its goal. Nor would they stop the ascension of McCain. Had they abstained, which under party rules was the only act of opposition they were allowed, it would be a symbolic act.
So Bunce and the other Paul delegates decided to use the political capital they had gained during the months-long war with the state party to try to generate a little more.
“We gave an olive branch,” he said.
This was not an easy gesture.
The Paul contingent has battled the state Republican Party all year. After a few of them were ultimately invited to St. Paul, they arrived only to feel like unwanted cousins.
Bunce and Chris Dyer tell a funny story about trying to sit next to each other on the floor of the convention, only to be told by state party leaders they must sit in their assigned seats, separated from each other.
When the state finally relented on the last night of the convention, Bunce was already on a plane home.
“I understand their fears,” Bunce said. “They think we’re all crazy.”
Bunce ends a lot of sentences that way — with the acknowledgment that most people think the Paul people are crazy.
They’re tired of being kooks. They want to be players.
I really don’t know what to say about the Nevada delegates, especially after I used up a lot of my energy being upset with the similar route the Massachusetts’ delegates opted to take.
They caved, plain and simple.
Weak. Disappointing. Heart-breaking.
5 Responses to “Ron Paul Nevada Delegates Voted for McCain Too”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I respect your and bile’s support for Ron Paul’s bid for his party’s nomination, but I’m not surprised at this end game. While I’d guess that the two of you don’t consider yourselves Republicans, I’m disappointed that any persons identifying themselves as such expect any real change from this party. (Same goes for the Democrats as well.) From here on out, it’s name calling and blue team vs. red team, issues be damned. ::sigh::
September 7th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Given the biased laws against 3rd parties and what appears the general dislike of apolitical activism (especially as the fascism increases in the nation) I don’t know that we can expect change from the outside either. At least no only. I take an all attack vector approach. If I think political action will work, I’ll do some political. If I think apolitical action will help, I’ll do apolitical. I think Paul did more for the liberty movement than the LP had in the past 20 years. Even if their version of liberty isn’t as pure as I’d like… just about everyone was in their position at some point. They are still light years ahead of the ‘country first’ fascists in the Republican party now. No one expected the Ron Paul people to overcome the neocons in a year. The results of Goldwater took 16 years to spring forth. What is most frustrating in this particular case is that given our association with many Paul supporters and knowing how dedicated they were to Paul and against the neocons… the fact they just voted for unity when we all know there isn’t any common threads is extremely disapointing.
It’s hard to quantify change… especially in the short term. What is ‘real change?’ Changing the minds of men is usually a slow process… i don’t think any true Paul supporter expects short term ‘real change’ or that working within the Republicrat party is the only way to win. Most I know realize working without is just as important.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
i suspected the ron paul delegates that went to the RNC to be just as serious and dedicated as the supporters that we met along the way during the last year. i didnt foresee those delegates to turn their back on the principles they were fighting for during the entire campaign. they were selected to represent us. its a shame, and as i said before, it took the movement a few steps backwards.
this argument of “you scratch my back, ill scratch yours” is completely naive and extending the “olive branch” is uterly ludicrous. these delegates made no progress, and if anything, it made the movement look exactly the way the media wanted to project us as the entire time: fringe, wavering, a passing trend, a joke, more bark less bite (i could go on an on).
they surrendered and deserve nothing.
September 7th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
What exactly did these delegates get when Chris Blanc from Cambridge claims, “We decided the best course of action was to give a little to get a lot.”
Now to something I don’t understand. This website explains details about the Massachusetts Republican Delegation: “40 of 43 delegates to the Republican National Convention are pledged to presidential contenders based on the results of the voting in today’s Massachusetts Presidential Primary: 40 delegates allocated proportionally to presidential contenders based on the primary vote statewide. A mandatory 15 percent threshold is required in order for a presidential contender to be allocated National Convention delegates.”
I’m not sure exactly what the rules are for when people drop out, but if you were to only consider McCain and Paul votes, Paul still won less than 5%, far below threshold. I can only guess that delegates of dropouts default to uncommitted and can vote however they like? Otherwise, it sounds like media is overstating the number of Paul delegates that MA actually sent. I only see three total uncommited delegates on their spreadsheet. The rest fail the 15 percent threshold test. Did someone liberally round up to “about a dozen”?
September 7th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
from reading the massachusetts and nevada stories, i can only speculate that “[giving] a little to get a lot”, meant the delegates in question were hoping to gain some footing with those in their individual state’s republican party–like the nevada article mentioned, “they’re tired of being kooks. they want to be players.” no matter how they spin it, it was a bad call. the R’s and D’s are so far down the rabbit hole, that their “peace offering” just gets lost on the way down.
as far as the rest of your question, i cant comment specifically since each state runs their big show differently.