2016 GOP nomination rules changes

[Statistikhengst]

The Green Papers: What's New

By a vote of 153-9, the RNC updated their 2016 Presidential nomination rules on Friday 24 January 2014. While we do not have a copy of changes made since the 2016 rules were approved by the 2012 Convention, we do have comments based on media reports.

1. The February 2016 positions of 4 carve out states-- Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada-- are now protected by additional penalties. States beginning their process too early will have their delegates reduced to their 3 RNC delegates plus 1/3 of their delegation or 9 delegates which ever is smaller (we are unsure of the exact math here). In 2012, 5 states Arizona, Florida, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina received a 50% penalty for violating party rules.

2. States beginning their process from 1 to 15 March 2016 must have an element of proportionally in their allocation. Note that in 2012 only 6 jurisdictions-- Arizona, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, New Jersey, and Utah-- allocated purely winner-take-all. Many states used a "winner-take-most" process.

3. At a later date, the RNC will vote on moving their 2016 convention to late June or July. The 2012 Convention was held Monday 27 August - Thursday 30 August 2012.

4. States must complete their delegate selection process no later than 45 days before the convention. There would be an exemption for states that are unable to change their primary dates. Hence, the 2016 nomination process would run from say January/February to mid-May. In 2012, the process began with Iowa on Tuesday 3 January 2012 and continued through Saturday 14 July 2012 with Nebraska.

The proportionality issue is one that makes the GOP nomination process look somewhat more like the Democratic Party nomination process.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is being reported in news/media outlets all over the place:

2012 Republican Primary - Delegate Rules

GOP adopts changes to 2016 presidential primary process ? CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

To prevent other states from jumping the order and compelling the first four to move their dates even earlier in January, as they did in 2012, any state that attempts to hold its nominating contest in February would have their number of delegates to the convention slashed to just nine people or, in the case of smaller states, one-third of their delegation - whichever number is smaller.

"It's the death penalty," said one RNC member. To wit: If Florida, which has flouted calendar rules in the past, violates RNC rules and holds its 2016 primary in February, its 99-member convention delegation would all but vanish. The state legislature in Florida has already moved to avoid an early primary in 2016.

RNC To Change 2016 Rules - The Daily Beast

RNC Changes Primary Rules to Empower Voters, Strengthen Nominee

Republicans to tighten rules on primary calendar

In a new era in which future presidential nominees are unlikely to accept federal matching funds, the new rules would schedule the presidential nominating convention in June or July, at least a month earlier than in previous years. Under rules that gave major party presidential nominees tens of millions of dollars, parties in recent decades have held conventions later and later in the year....

...The earlier convention will give the eventual nominee at least an extra month to fundraise and unite the party after what is expected to be a contentious primary battle.

RNC tightens 2016 primary calendar, rules | TheHill

The lopsided vote came despite repeated protestations from conservatives, led by Blackwell, over a few aspects of the rules. But the Virginian had few allies in the meeting, and after a fiery Thursday committee meeting, seemed resigned to the rules' passage.

Blackwell and Priebus even joked back and forth at one point over his stubbornness. After Blackwell moved for debate on an amendment, Priebus asked him if it was the same amendment he'd lost a vote on in the Thursday's meeting.

"Thank you for reminding me," he said wryly to laughs from many on the committee.

New RNC Rules Move Up 2016 Convention | RealClearPolitics

“It really is about winning the White House,” an RNC official said. “We’re tired of being out of the White House.”

The RNC is expected to vote later this year on an initiative to increase the national party’s control over who moderates the primary debates that are sponsored and hosted by media outlets.

The host city of the 2016 Republican National Convention is still to be determined. Finalists include Las Vegas, Phoenix, Kansas City, Denver and Columbus, Ohio.

On the final day of its annual winter meeting on Friday, South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott was the featured luncheon speaker.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are interested to see how complex the computations for delegates have often been in the GOP primaries, here is an analysis I did in 2012:

Statistikhengst's ELECTORAL POLITICS - 2013 and beyond: 2012 GOP Primary Season Calendar - massive update

(there is a large table there, chronologically. Check out the "allocation" column).


Finally, I need to compliment Reince Priebus on doing this. This was part of the so-called "autopsy" that he did following Mitt Romney's loss to President Obama in 2012, and this is one area where he has direct control and he kept his word. Were I a Republican, I would have suggested doing exactly what he did. So, in spite of that that I come from the other side of the fence, my hat is off to Reince Preibus for having gotten this done.

What is not clear yet is whether the number of debates among the potential GOP contenders will be reduced, etc.


your thoughts?

-------------------------------------------------------------

[MENTION=45104]WelfareQueen[/MENTION] [MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=36528]cereal_killer[/MENTION] [MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION]

 

[JoeB131]

my own thought is, the RNC seems to think that the length of the process hurt Romney because he had to keep beating back surging challengers.

In short, they want a shorter, quicker process so that they could nail down an establishment candidate.

What they don't want to realize, Romney was an awful candidate most of the GOP rank and file didn't really want to start with. They were even willing to give clowns like Santorum and Gingrich a good look before they settled on Romney. It's really the same mistake the Democrats made in 2004 with Kerry, the GOP made in 1996 with Dole.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The GOP does realize that the new formats will greatly reduce the amount of pandering to the far right.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The GOP does realize that the new formats will greatly reduce the amount of pandering to the far right.

Yes. And it also gives candidates in the middle of the field a chance to break away from the pack, should be be suffering in one region of the country, but not in another.

On the other hand, in a five way race or so, it could conceivably, but only conceivably, lead to a hung convention, which we have not seen since 1940.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That would be fun to watch.

 

[JoeB131]

The GOP does realize that the new formats will greatly reduce the amount of pandering to the far right.

Yes. And it also gives candidates in the middle of the field a chance to break away from the pack, should be be suffering in one region of the country, but not in another.

On the other hand, in a five way race or so, it could conceivably, but only conceivably, lead to a hung convention, which we have not seen since 1940.

Again, I don't buy that the GOP's problem is that the candidates "pander to the right".

The only two real post-Watergate successes the GOP has had are Reagan and Dubya Bush. Guys who were sincerely conservative.

Where they have had problems were guys like Dole, McCain and Romney, guys who just wanted to do Wall Street's business in Washington, but had to pretend they cared bout guns and abortions and the gheys getting married. So when the rank and file of dumbasses and bubbas sensed their lack of sincerity, they gravitated towards sincere guys that panicked the Wall Street types.

i.e. Buchanan, Huckabee and Santorum.

Now, during my trip away from the GOP, I had a discussion with my ex-boss, the douchebag who fired me because I ran up too many medical bills. And during the week and a half that Huckabee looked like he might pull ahead of the pack in 2008, this guy sputtered he'd vote for Hillary if Huckabee won the GOP nomination.

There you have it, guys. What the people who REALLY run the GOP think of social conservatives.

So the RNC is trying to fix the wrong problem. Not that they aren't connecting with voters, but that they are trying to trick people into voting against their own economic interests and wanting to reduce the amount of scrutiny these guys get.

 

[joshuah]

Not sure if GOP is trying to tip scales here or how... they're kinda stuck between the rock and hard place. They know the Huckabee's and Santorum's can't win a general, but neither have the moderates (McCain, Romney) last two cycles. So do they push for Christie as third time's a charm, or 3 strikes? Paul might have the sweet spot of just enough evangelical for the evangelicals but not too much to turn off everybody else, but his views probably aren't popular enough and showmanship not attractive enough. Cruz might be too evangelical, not sure where Jeb falls. It'll be a lot more exciting if Hillary doesn't run, all I know.