Reader comments
GOP central committee to meet about Romney delegates
26 comments | Read story
Anonymous | 2:02 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
I'd like to be able to support the Republican party, but they won't
even follow their own rules. This is a very greasey manuver.
Ex-GOP | 2:41 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
I too would like to support the Republican Party, but they are no different -
and no less liberal - than the Democrats these days.
McCain equals Obama.
I must vote for Bob Barr.
McCain equals Obama.
I must vote for Bob Barr.
Comments continue below
arc | 4:04 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
If they couldn't figure out how to do it in May, when they had over 3000
delegates there, how do they do it without any delegates voting for it. If they
were going to change the choice now, why didn't they do it in June, or
July?
If they get 180 votes from the party central committee now, or at least 120, I would be OK with it.
This sets a bad precedent. Perhaps we should vote Lockhart out next year.
If they get 180 votes from the party central committee now, or at least 120, I would be OK with it.
This sets a bad precedent. Perhaps we should vote Lockhart out next year.
Ken Baguley | 4:24 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Let's face it! McCain isn't the most conservative. What's the
choice? None...Vote for McCain. When he picks his V.P. it had better be Mitt.
If not, we're in deep yogurt. I'll send money when Mitt is selected.
State Delegate | 4:39 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
I am a State Delegate and I attended the recent GOP convention. Stan Lockhart
should not have the authority to discount the opinion of the delegates and just
do what he wanted to do in the first place. This is not the will of those who
attended the GOP convention, and the fact is that many of us are wary of McCain
as a presidential candidate and saw this as a way of telling him that he
reluctantly has our support. It's a small gesture and it will not prevent
him from receiving the nomination. Surely, this will not prevent him from
choosing a Vice Presidential candidate, and it should have no bearing on Mitt
Romney's chances. Mitt either has the clout to get the nod all by himself
or he doesn't, but Stan Lockhart should just leave well enough alone. This
is the exact kind of political manuevering that got the Cannon brother's
booted, as well as, David Leavitt. The State Delegates do not take kindly to
being ignored or overturned by those that think they know better because of
their political position and good-ole boy network.
So much for party rules | 4:40 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
He tried to get a resolution passed at the state convention to release the
delegates to vote for McCain to give the appearance of a unanimous decision at
the national convention. The delegates at the state convention shot it down
faster than he could count credentials. So he couldn't get this done by
abiding Utah GOP rules, so I guess he's setting the standard that rules
really aren't that important... except if they benefit his agenda...
State Delegate too | 5:00 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
As a state delegate, I'm outraged that Lockhart would attempt this kind of
maneuvering. He may be able to pull a fast one at the State Central Committee
meeting, but he'll be cashing in all his political capital in the state
party.
But perhaps that's what this is all about isn't it, future Ambassador Lockhart?
But perhaps that's what this is all about isn't it, future Ambassador Lockhart?
still waiting | 5:08 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
A vote for Romney?
I'm still waiting for him explain what he meant when he told KSL-TV: "God hasn't spoken to man since Moses."
Was he suggesting Joseph Smith was a liar?
I'm still waiting for him explain what he meant when he told KSL-TV: "God hasn't spoken to man since Moses."
Was he suggesting Joseph Smith was a liar?
Re: arc | 5:14 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
"This sets a bad precedent. Perhaps we should vote Lockhart out next
year."
'Ya Think? That was the understatement of the day.
'Ya Think? That was the understatement of the day.
Who cares? | 5:36 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
I voted for Romney in the Primary, but he threw in the towel in order to be
gracious. I'd be willing to wager that McCain wouldn't have done the
same. Is Utah the only state that binds its delegates to the Primary vote
outcome? I suspect not, but since Romney is no longer a choice, who really
cares? If Romney's not on the Republican ticket in November, I won't
vote for the Republicans, but I doubt that the way Utah's delegates vote at
the convention will have no impact on the outcome...
Drew Chamberlain | 6:09 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Stan,Stan,Stan... Not a good move.
State Delegate | 6:14 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Chairman Lockhart presented this exact action at the State Convention and when
he saw that he didn't have enough support to get the delegates released, He
and the establishment sent one of their obedient wannabe's to "table
the action". At the convention, more than a dozen delegates discussed the
"tabling" and we knew this would come up in the State Central
Committee because Lockhart thinks he has a better chance of releasing the
delegates with this committee. We, the delegates will remember how the
establishment ignores our wishes. Ideas have consequences.
David Edward Garber | 6:18 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Although I wholeheartedly agree that Utah's GOP by-laws are flawed in this
regard, as a matter of principle, I don't believe that it's
appropriate to change election rules in the middle of an election process, as
Lockhart keeps stubbornly trying to do. I keep wondering who exactly he's
working for, since it's clearly not for grassroots Republicans like me.
Utah's Republican voters, on February 5th, voted overwhelmingly to bind their national delegation to vote for Mitt Romney. Their state delegates, despite opposition from party leaders, seemed clearly in favor of keeping it this way at their state convention. But these party leaders seem to be determined to get Utah's GOP to deliver the outcomes that they want, despite our wishes. It's as if we exist to serve their interests, and not the other way 'round. It's despicable!
As a lifelong Republican, I want a party ruled by law (or rules, in this case) and not by men. And one whose leaders serve grassroots Utah Republicans rather than powerful national elites. If Mitt and/or others feel "embarrassed" by their lack of dictatorial control over Utah's GOP, as evidenced by an undesired Romney vote during McCain's coronation, then so be it.
Utah's Republican voters, on February 5th, voted overwhelmingly to bind their national delegation to vote for Mitt Romney. Their state delegates, despite opposition from party leaders, seemed clearly in favor of keeping it this way at their state convention. But these party leaders seem to be determined to get Utah's GOP to deliver the outcomes that they want, despite our wishes. It's as if we exist to serve their interests, and not the other way 'round. It's despicable!
As a lifelong Republican, I want a party ruled by law (or rules, in this case) and not by men. And one whose leaders serve grassroots Utah Republicans rather than powerful national elites. If Mitt and/or others feel "embarrassed" by their lack of dictatorial control over Utah's GOP, as evidenced by an undesired Romney vote during McCain's coronation, then so be it.
arc | 6:30 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Who was the guy that ran against Lockhart last time and got 2nd place. He seemed
pretty sharp.
The fact that Romney has asked for the votes to be given to McCain and the convention proposal wasn't accepted, creates a problem.
If getting the 180 votes from the committee since we are not meeting again as delegates until next year, was possible, it would have some credibility. If Lockhart tries to do this without 2/3 of the 180 votes, he not only will be tossed next year, there is a good chance that all of Utah's National delegates will be tossed, making the primary election void. That would be a nightmare for everyone. Lockhart should leave it alone.
Repeat: Lockhart better let everything alone.
It is real simple:
"Utah Congratulates Senator John McCain for the National party nomination for the Next President of the United States. Based on State Party Rules and according to the results of State Primary, the Delegates Of Utah support Mitt Romney for president. Gov. Mitt Romney has asked that these votes be counted toward Senator John McCain for any future voting. We agree."
The fact that Romney has asked for the votes to be given to McCain and the convention proposal wasn't accepted, creates a problem.
If getting the 180 votes from the committee since we are not meeting again as delegates until next year, was possible, it would have some credibility. If Lockhart tries to do this without 2/3 of the 180 votes, he not only will be tossed next year, there is a good chance that all of Utah's National delegates will be tossed, making the primary election void. That would be a nightmare for everyone. Lockhart should leave it alone.
Repeat: Lockhart better let everything alone.
It is real simple:
"Utah Congratulates Senator John McCain for the National party nomination for the Next President of the United States. Based on State Party Rules and according to the results of State Primary, the Delegates Of Utah support Mitt Romney for president. Gov. Mitt Romney has asked that these votes be counted toward Senator John McCain for any future voting. We agree."
Mahershalalhashbaz | 10:16 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Confused. I'm no political science major, so I don't get this whole
debate at all. Can someone explain what's going on?
Clair Ellis | 10:51 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Here is the relevant text from the GOP Bylaws: "On the first ballot, the
national delegation shall be bound to vote for the candidate who has received
the most votes in the Republican Presidential Primary, but the delegation shall
not be bound on any subsequent ballots."
The effect of that sentence depends on the meaning of the word "candidate." Is it inclusive of all those who were candidates at the time of the Primary or is it only those who are candidates "on the first ballot" at the convention? That is a legitimate question. Romney was a primary election candidate but is not a convention candidate, since he has withdrawn.
I can be argued that the tense of the verb "has received" places the question of candidacy at the time of the convention, not the primary. If it were written, "had received," the candidacy would be of the time of the primary, not the convention. (Editor, help us out here.)
The State Central Committee is being asked to render an interpretation of that ambiguity, which is its duty according to Roberts Rules of Order, page 570. The GOP takes its rules seriously, and the committee will do its duty.
The effect of that sentence depends on the meaning of the word "candidate." Is it inclusive of all those who were candidates at the time of the Primary or is it only those who are candidates "on the first ballot" at the convention? That is a legitimate question. Romney was a primary election candidate but is not a convention candidate, since he has withdrawn.
I can be argued that the tense of the verb "has received" places the question of candidacy at the time of the convention, not the primary. If it were written, "had received," the candidacy would be of the time of the primary, not the convention. (Editor, help us out here.)
The State Central Committee is being asked to render an interpretation of that ambiguity, which is its duty according to Roberts Rules of Order, page 570. The GOP takes its rules seriously, and the committee will do its duty.
Clair Ellis | 10:54 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Oops. Make that 3rd paragraph read, "It can be argued..."
CaptainHairDOO | 10:55 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
I think this is a terrible move. The incredible resounding choice of the
Republican voters in Utah chose ROMNEY in the presidential preference primary.
The rules of the party absolutely do NOT allow for the delegates to be unbound.
Sorry Mitt, would you rather us break the rules, and allow you to sully
yourself, and further tarnish the Republican brand?
Independent Utahn | 11:21 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Just the Utah GOP at work again...bring out the hard hats! Please provide Utah
a balanced representation of both Democrats and the Good Ol' boy Party. I
like what I am seeing with the current line of Democrats such as Corroon and
Matheson and willing to give other demos a shot over the socialistic Utah GOP
and their croonies, Curtis, Valentine, Huntsman and the lot of them.
Sorry Utah repubs, you're just not impressive anymore and have forgotten the people of this fine state. For Lockhart and the others, its all about keeping the party line and screw the people of this state.
PS: Lockarts new GOP billboards state that "I can" meaning Lockhart can do anything!
Sorry Utah repubs, you're just not impressive anymore and have forgotten the people of this fine state. For Lockhart and the others, its all about keeping the party line and screw the people of this state.
PS: Lockarts new GOP billboards state that "I can" meaning Lockhart can do anything!
roma | 11:26 p.m. Aug. 11, 2008
Now that you people have me totaly confused,I think I will retire for the night.
I have no idea who's on first, second or third,so if I get the ball I
shall throw it out to left field. thanks!
Rob Alexander | 12:30 a.m. Aug. 12, 2008
Re: Clair Ellis
FEC information indicates Romney is still technically a presidential candidate.
Also, at Romney's Web site, clicking the "Continue" link will take you to his campaign Web site, which is still titled "Mitt Romney for President" and is still functional and informational.
It appears that the situation of the winner of the presidential primary suspending his campaign prior to the national convention was not contemplated in the party governing documents. However, the overwhelming voice of the Republican voters at the presidential primary and delegates at the state convention has been heard for this year on the issue.
Rob Alexander
REPUBLican State Delegate, Salt Lake County
REPUBLican Candidate for State Representative
Utah Legislative District 35
FEC information indicates Romney is still technically a presidential candidate.
Also, at Romney's Web site, clicking the "Continue" link will take you to his campaign Web site, which is still titled "Mitt Romney for President" and is still functional and informational.
It appears that the situation of the winner of the presidential primary suspending his campaign prior to the national convention was not contemplated in the party governing documents. However, the overwhelming voice of the Republican voters at the presidential primary and delegates at the state convention has been heard for this year on the issue.
Rob Alexander
REPUBLican State Delegate, Salt Lake County
REPUBLican Candidate for State Representative
Utah Legislative District 35
Damon | 10:11 a.m. Aug. 12, 2008
As a Republican I am outraged. If the central committee goes against the will of
the Utah GOP convention then im checking out. I will not be in a group that will
not even obey the will of its membership.
Upset Utahn | 10:58 a.m. Aug. 12, 2008
Most folks in Utah are asleep when it comes to politics. Many only give a
passing thought to the subject and when Mormon Romney came along it was a no
brainer for 90% of the state. The other 10% would vote for McCain just because
he's a known republican - regardless of how he actually votes, thinks, acts
or what he wants to do with our tax dollars. I've said it before and I will
say it again Ron Paul is the only true conservative that ran as a Republican.
If any national delegates are reading this and do get released to vote openly at
the national convention - I admonish you to go look at Ron Paul's voting
record, his economic philosophy, his foreign policy, his stance on immigration
and so forth. He is by far the only TRUE Republican that ran for President.
The rest were and still are RINO's.
re: Clair Ellis | 4:23 p.m. Aug. 12, 2008
Hi Clair,
So here is how I see this:
1) The language in the UTGOP bylaw either states that a person needs to be a candidate at convention or not to receive the mandated votes. The text you referred to: "has received" seems very clear to me that a person must be a candidate at the time of convention to receive the mandated vote. Given that clarity, no interpreting vote is required nor can be given by either the convention or the central committe and Mr. Lockhart is correct about not needing any votes. If a clear argument with specifics can be made that this term is unclear then the central committee can certainly vote on what the meaning is.
2) It is also clear that if Mr. Romney is still an official candidate by the time of the convention, then he must receive the mandated votes.
So the only question here for me is if Mr. Romney remains an official candidate with a suspended candidacy or if he is officially withdrawn from the race at the time of the convention.
The rest of this hub-bub is just about folks trying to agitate and fan the flames of discontent.
So here is how I see this:
1) The language in the UTGOP bylaw either states that a person needs to be a candidate at convention or not to receive the mandated votes. The text you referred to: "has received" seems very clear to me that a person must be a candidate at the time of convention to receive the mandated vote. Given that clarity, no interpreting vote is required nor can be given by either the convention or the central committe and Mr. Lockhart is correct about not needing any votes. If a clear argument with specifics can be made that this term is unclear then the central committee can certainly vote on what the meaning is.
2) It is also clear that if Mr. Romney is still an official candidate by the time of the convention, then he must receive the mandated votes.
So the only question here for me is if Mr. Romney remains an official candidate with a suspended candidacy or if he is officially withdrawn from the race at the time of the convention.
The rest of this hub-bub is just about folks trying to agitate and fan the flames of discontent.
re: hub-bub | 9:09 a.m. Aug. 18, 2008
There are a few issues here:
First there is the legitimate question of Romney's candidacy. He shrewdly "suspended" his campaign instead of "ending" it and then publicly threw his support to McCain. Technically this leaves him a viable candidate, should some kind of scandal or something break loose for McCain.
But more importantly the 3000+ state delegates already pondered the question of whether they wanted to release Romney's delegates and re-bind them to McCain. There was not nearly enough support for the idea amongst the general GOP leadership represented there and the issue was easily tabled.
Now Stan Lockhart comes along -- embarrassed amongst his national peers that he couldn't get the Utah state delegates to cave to national pressure [even with the request from Romney himself!] -- and he makes up a bogus story about how all the local leaders really wanted to unbind the delegates but there were some timing issues during the state convention . . . I was amongst those debating the issue and I've never heard that - it certainly was *not* why the vote failed.
This is a typical elitist vote from Lockhart -- overturning local GOP votes at whim.
First there is the legitimate question of Romney's candidacy. He shrewdly "suspended" his campaign instead of "ending" it and then publicly threw his support to McCain. Technically this leaves him a viable candidate, should some kind of scandal or something break loose for McCain.
But more importantly the 3000+ state delegates already pondered the question of whether they wanted to release Romney's delegates and re-bind them to McCain. There was not nearly enough support for the idea amongst the general GOP leadership represented there and the issue was easily tabled.
Now Stan Lockhart comes along -- embarrassed amongst his national peers that he couldn't get the Utah state delegates to cave to national pressure [even with the request from Romney himself!] -- and he makes up a bogus story about how all the local leaders really wanted to unbind the delegates but there were some timing issues during the state convention . . . I was amongst those debating the issue and I've never heard that - it certainly was *not* why the vote failed.
This is a typical elitist vote from Lockhart -- overturning local GOP votes at whim.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Favre to Rice helps Vikings win 4:19 p.m.
- Photos: A Royal welcome 3:58 p.m.
- Bengals beat Steelers 3:06 p.m.
- Johnson, Titans beats Bills 41-17 3:05 p.m.
- Bush helps Saints stay unbeaten 3:04 p.m.
- Redskins end skid with 27-17 win 2:58 p.m.
- Keys may help identify body 2:57 p.m.
- Scobee's FG lifts Jags over Jets 2:56 p.m.
- Panthers harass Ryan, beat Falcons 2:50 p.m.
- Henne helps Dolphins rally by Bucs 2:45 p.m.
- SLC council OKs gay rights policies
361 - BYU happy to escape with victory224
- TCU creams U.216
- Editorial: Mormons and gay rights201
- Will state consider gay rights law?148
- Letters: Strange breed in Utah133
- Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?130
- Utes remain silent about BCS120
- RSL heads to MLS title game117
- Celtics crush Jazz104
Sears is holding a special VIP night Sunday, Nov. 15, in stores and online.
How do you handle kids and contests? Our oldest daughter, 7, is of the...
Advertisement
Latest comments
The Utah BYU game is a toss up. Neither of these teams realy look that good....
"You are an idiot!!!" Wow, impressive point. Good sound use of logic. Way...
Yes we just barely beat New Mexico by 5, and yet we are ranked higher than...
Re: re:KC I think you are confused, ESPN has absolutely no ownership in...
Well TCU should thank Utah. Because of Utah busting the BCS twice, and...
Why do some members like to cry the woe is me story to everyone? Geez! Life...
Give it up. the SINS of SODOM and GOMORTAH were many and not limited,...
Rebel defense is astonishing!
As to the wish by someone who wants BYU to play USC in the vegas bowl, be...
Ezekial didn't say anything about rape either. By your logic, he must have...
Advertisements
What does it matter if a delegate represents Romney or if a delegate represents McCain. They are both liberal and both served as nails in the coffin for the Party of Barry Goldwater.