Monday, June 4, 2012

The Great Paulista Delegate Steal

Let me preface by saying the following:

First in no way do I intend to paint with a broad brush all of the supporters of Texas US Representative Ron Paul. Many of the Paulista delegates I spoke with at the convention had reservations about how the rump convention was handled and that the results of the Louisiana Republican presidential primary should have been honored. Furthermore, I recognize and respect their dedication and hard work that paid off with a major upset in the state GOP’s delegate caucuses.

Secondly, I want to state that I am writing this as someone who was involved in the Louisiana Republican Presidential Primary as former Senator Rick Santorum’s state political director, a participant in the state caucuses and finally a delegate to the recent state Republican convention.

The convention was marred with controversy and confrontation though the heart of the entire matter was this: whether the Ron Paul forces were going to successfully steal the ten delegates won by Santorum in the state’s presidential primary.


Everything else are sideshows amplified in the blogosphere to distract from the delegate theft by representatives of a candidate who received a mere 6% of the vote in a taxpayer-funded statewide election that drew a record number of Louisiana Republicans to the polls.

The state GOP’s supplemental rules did not deny the pro-Paul delegates anything beyond preventing them from raiding the fifteen delegates that were awarded in a primary that Paul fell 19 points below the threshold to qualify for.

And where the Paul forces failed to win through the democratic system, they have attempted to hijack through “an overreach” in the caucuses and the state convention.

Louisiana’s delegates to the Republican National Convention were to be divided in the following manner:

Three delegates were to be represented by the state party chairman and national committeeman and national committeewoman;

Twenty delegates were to be determined in the March 24th presidential primary with candidates required to attain a minimum of 25% to receive a proportional share;

Five delegates were to be determined by the state Republican leadership;

Finally, eighteen delegates were to be decided by the state delegates elected in the state GOP’s caucuses in late April when the race for the party nomination was already decided.

Only two candidates met the 25% minimum threshold for delegates in the primary, Santorum, who carried the state with received 49% in the primary and thus was to receive half of the twenty, and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who ran a distant second with 27%, thus entitling him to a quarter of the delegates (5).

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich placed third with 16%, scoring twice as many votes as Paul through falling 9 points below the minimum to receive delegates from the primary.

The five unallocated delegates from the primary were to be decided at the state convention.

When the caucuses were held a month later, the race for the GOP nomination had ended for all practical purposes with only Paul seriously contending the state’s caucuses, which partly explains how the party’s de facto nominee ran a distant third.

Pro-Paul delegates swept four congressional districts (entitling them to twelve delegates) but lost out in the state’s other two districts (the 3rd and the 4th). These two districts would later figure prominently in the Paulistas’ brazen attempt to steal delegates through their “protest session” at the state GOP convention.

Soon after the caucuses, I spoke with the leader of the Paul effort in Louisiana, who assured me that the results of the state’s primary would be respected. However he was singing a much different tune days before the state convention when I was informed that I should have no expectation of Santorum delegates being seated since the Pennsylvanian was out of the race.

That his candidate (Paul) also effectively suspended his presidential campaign after a drubbing in his home state primary apparently didn’t matter.

When the Louisiana Republican leadership adopted supplemental rules to protect the results of an election that drew over 180,000 voters, the Paulistas cried foul, conspiracy, etc.

How dare these establishment types act to protect the will of the people and foil their attempt to steal the results of a statewide election!

Any other gripe issued by the Paulistas was meant to distract from this reality since the Paulista majority at the convention were still free to choose their people to take the seats on the national convention’s standing committees, claim 12 of the 18 delegates that were up for grabs through the district caucuses and grab the 5 leftover statewide delegates from the presidential primary.

The latter was not a bad deal for the Paulistas since they were scooping up five delegates after receiving a paltry 6% of the statewide vote while Romney needed to win over a quarter for his five delegates.

But 17 delegates were not enough for the 6%ers. They wanted everything.

They wanted Santorum’s ten and Romney’s five as well. In their mind, there was no problem with a candidate who received 6% of the vote receiving 70% of the state’s delegates to the Republican National Convention and totally disregarding the will of the state’s Republican voters.

I suppose those same people would think it fine if a Democratic legislature got to choose the presidential electors after a state voted for a Republican presidential candidate.

And then the state media started to poke into their scheming and their state leaders fumbled their convoluted justification for their mass delegate theft to the press.

All of a sudden the Paulistas became generous…with Santorum’s delegates.

According to the delegate list the “rump” Paul convention forwarded to the Republican National Committee, seven of the ten delegates Santorum was to receive from the presidential primary went to people who did not support him.

Six went to Paul supporters and the other went to State Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain, who initially endorsed Texas governor Rick Perry and then Romney. Of the three delegates who were on the official Santorum list that were seated by the Paulistas, two had a previous professional relationship with the leader of the state Paul campaign.

Left out of the delegate list were a number of donors and volunteers who worked across the state for Santorum in the primary, including Bill Dore, an oil man who contributed over $1,000,000.00 to the pro-Santorum Super PAC and had raised money for Santorum’s presidential campaign.

Dore had been listed as the first delegate on the Santorum priority list but managed to only clear alternate delegate status on the Paul list.

The Paul-blessed alternate delegate list for the Santorum served as a “storage unit” for delegates confirmed by the official state party convention. In addition to Dore, two others were demoted from delegate to alternate delegate in a crass move to ensure that the Paul bogus “Santorum” delegates act as Paul delegates.

Santorum was to receive ten delegates and ten alternates from the primary, which is exactly what the official state Republican convention adopted. The Paulista protest convention gave Santorum three delegates and five alternates.

Those who screamed the loudest about process and democracy are guilty of stealing twelve spots in this instance, though their thievery continued elsewhere.

Paulistas decided to help themselves to delegates in the third and fourth congressional districts, where they blanked out in the former and were a minority in the latter.

Yet seize they did, and by default failing to recognize the will of those who participated in the caucuses in those districts. So much for the people, procedure, ethics, etc.

There are some other points of relevance that should be considered.

First, when the district caucuses were held at the official state Republican convention, the congressional districts where the Paulistas won in the April caucuses went unfilled with one exception, which I will go over in a moment.

Rather than take advantage of the Paulistas refusal to participate in the convention proceedings, the same state party leaders they have decried as autocrats respected the results of the caucuses and did not elect non-Paulistas to those delegate and alternate delegate slots, exhibiting better judgment, fairness and integrity than the Paulistas displayed throughout the entire process.

Secondly, one Paul delegate (Wallace Lucas in the second congressional district) recognized the legitimacy of the state party procedure by complying with the rules and was the one individual elected at the official state GOP convention in a congressional district caucus won by the Paulistas. His election by the delegates participating in the state GOP convention was unanimous.

Thirdly, the Paulistas operated in secrecy. At no point did they extend an invitation to other delegates in their carefully orchestrated “protest convention” nor did they inform any Santorum official about how they would address the ten Santorum delegate slots.

We found out about their delegate list days later.

Fourthly, the misinformation and propaganda offensive by the Paulistas has hit overdrive in the blogosphere, most notably through their attempt to make it appear that Romney’s camp has embraced their actions through spinning some pleasantries offered to them by Louisiana Romney leader Scott Sewell.

I would caution the Paulistas not to read too much into Sewell’s words as he was the very Romney official who “adopted” Santorum and Gingrich delegate candidates on to the official Romney caucus slate in a desperate attempt to stop the Paulistas from winning the April caucuses.

In conclusion the real stories of the contentious state Republican convention in Shreveport were not the “arrests”, rule supplements or the screaming and shouting.

The confrontations were an essential part of a Paulista strategy to create a fog of confusion to mask the wide scale delegate thefts by the Paulistas, which is what really mattered.

Through their actions, the Louisiana Paulista leadership demonstrated contempt and disregard for a presidential primary and the 170,000 Republican voters who did not vote for their candidate and the over 90,000 who voted for Santorum in addition to ignoring the results of the delegate caucuses in the third and fourth congressional districts.

The Paulista forces will have a tough time explaining themselves to not only the mainstream media (which hasn’t bought what the Paulistas are selling) but, in the event this schism plays out through August, to the national Republican committee that will decide which Louisiana convention delegation is legitimate and which is not,

Any investigation into the dual conventions will not only cover what happened in Shreveport but also the means by which people were elected through the caucuses, revisiting the matter of the fraudulent Paulista caucus ballot with Romney at the header and the other controversies that were swept under the rug.

From a practical standpoint of those looking to go to Tampa, resolution in advance of the convention would be positive since traveling to these conclaves is pricey.

Tampa hotels are demanding an upfront payment with a five-night minimum at $200 a day.

Delegates who were recognized by only one of entities risk spending a lot of money going to a convention where they might not be seated, thus making for an expensive week at Busch Gardens or the Saint Pete Dog Track.

A path for resolution is clear and relatively simple to achieve.

The Paulistas need to recognize that Santorum delegates to the convention should be actual Santorum supporters and not bogus Paulistas sporting “legalize freedom” t-shirts under sweatervests and that they recognize they had no right to arbitrarily appoint delegates in the third and fourth congressional districts, which they lost in the caucuses.

On the other hand, state Republican leaders should act to fill the currently vacant district delegate and alternate delegate slots with bona fide Paul supporters who have expressed an interest and willingness to attend the Republican National Convention.

Furthermore, state GOP leaders should extend to the Louisiana Paulista leadership a courtesy the Paulistas did not extend to the Louisiana Santorum leadership by ensuring that their leaders are seated as full delegates and not “half delegates” (alternate delegates).

I also think it would be reasonable for the seats on the national convention’s standing committees to be evenly divided.

It should be noted that Louisiana GOP leaders have already declared their intention to fill the vacant delegate and alternate delegate slots with true Paul supporters.

Going to Tampa with a divided house is in nobody’s interest and will only result in lasting acrimony and a number of awfully disappointed unseated delegates and alternate delegates who will be out a lot of money.


Anonymous said...

At the last state convention, you REFUSED to talk to me because I was a Ron Paul supporter. You actually walked off and left me there mid-sentence. (this was at the reception that Friday night at the Hilton in Baton Rouge). I imagine that you can see my point when I say I find your whining entertaining. I also find this post entertaining, and I will be watching the national convention on TV so that I can toast the Ron Paul delegates. :) You reap what you sow, Buddy.

Mike Bayham said...

1) I don't know who you are.

2) I don't recall conversing with you.

3) I don't recall even attending that reception (you might have me confused with someone else)as I am pretty certain I drove up the morning of the convention straight to the state capitol.

4) I am friends with a number of pretty passionate Paul supporters so being an advocate of his is not something that would cause me to just walk off on people. At a candidate debate at English Turn, I made a point of hanging out with the Paul representative because she didn't know anyone there and she was standing in the middle of the room by herself. If you would like to introduce yourself to discuss this, feel free to email me at

drummergirl said...

If you are so interested in upholding the results of the taxpayer funded primary, maybe you should be interested in holding a primary election that isn't rife with fraud. Louisiana doesn't seem to know how to hold an honest election.

John said...

Mike, I am not sure what theft you are talking about? The whole reason to have the delegates bound is to insure that the candidate that they are bound to gets their vote on the first round of voting. The reason that they become unbound after the first round (in some states it's 2 rounds) is that if a candidate doesn't win then obviously having all of the delegates bound for a second, third, fourth etc. round would only result in the same stalemate. This is how the rules are, this is how the rules have been. It is not stealing to put a non-Santorum delegate bound to Santorum. Santorum will still get his votes and if he doesn't have enough on the first round, then let the games begin to see who can win the most delegates at the convention. Your bellyaching on this matter just shows that either you don't really understand the process or that you are just bitter and trying to drum up some sympathy from people who don't know any better. At the convention, you commented that the Paul people did a good job and that you picked up some delegates that you might not have if Roger were the one doling out the delegates. So which is it, the Ron Paul people are thieves or they gave your candidate (who has dropped out and endorsed Romney by the way in case you hadn't heard) a fair shake?

cajuncocoa said...

Sovereign said...

seriously? You think Paul supporters will suddenly see the side of "reason" when you call them Paulistas? They are more dedicated than Santorum supporters and you don't feel comfortable with that. With all the talk of being the Romney-alternative, your candidate and supporters (not all) have turned their back on their beliefs and now support the Republican version of Obama when the goal is supposedly to out Obama. Replace Obama with Obama? Looks like when the chips are down so many of you cash in and walk away. That doesn't make me feel like you held on to those beliefs very strongly in the first place. What else are you willing to compromise on?

Paul supporters played by the rules and because not enough of yours showed up, you decided to change the rules. (by people who met in secrecy I might add) You used violence, not them. Now there are lawsuits pending and rightfully so. I honestly believe the Paul supporters should be on the look out for the shady tactics of those who joined the Romney camp.

I may not have been on board with Mr. Santorum regarding some the details of how to better this country, but I had the utmost respect for those who did not yield to compromising their core principles. Romney will say and do whatever the highest bidder tells him to. God help us if we all must reap what you have sown.

libertysilver said...

I think the main point that you miss is that the Founders
of this great Country did not
envision a Democratic system.

They envisioned a Republic, where mob rule of the majority
would not take away the rights of individuals.

We are a Republic, and it appears that a lot of Republicans don't understand that very important point.

The Conventions are a perfect example of our Republic--When they are run
on Republican Principles--not by Democratic ones.

D. Lynn Dearden said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
D. Lynn Dearden said...

Mike Bayham wasn't even at the convention. As a side note when the Republican Central Committee tried to meet after the convention they did not have a quorum because of non-participation. The reason for caucuses is to help grass root candidates get a chance to be elected. If people are willing to spend $200 plus a Saturday and try and become a delegate; Santorum should have planned better. If we or the Founding Fathers wanted a democracy where the popular vote is all that matters they would not have created a democracy and not a REPUBLIC

Anonymous said...

Mr. Bayham,

My parents taught me that the ends don't justify the means and that's particularly true in this case. It was not your job to assure that Santorum got his "share" of delegates and I have a hard time understanding how you could possibly believe that! While it may sound good for your position to accuse Paul's supporters of stealing delegates, that simply isn't true. They participated legitimately in a process and got delegates elected - that's the way it works, like it or not!! If your "logic" held true, why not just have a primary with a popular vote and then divvy up the delegates accordingly. However, that's not the way caucuses work. The person who commented above is right and of all people, you should know that. Sorry, your excuses won't cut it and you all need to apologize to the body politic to whom you did much disservice.

Roger Hill said...

Mr. Bayham,
Although I did not attend the Louisiana State GOP Convention, I did attend the Missouri State Convention in Springfield this last Saturday. And being a Ron Paul Supporter myself, I was disappointed that we failed to elect our slate of Paul (and some Santorum) delegates to the National Convention. If only 70 - 75 more Santorum supporters joined us, Obamney would have been denied delegates. Instead, Romney supporters were joined by the vast majority of Santorum supporters to carry most of the delegate spots to Tampa for Romney.

Now here is my point...
Did we cry and make a stink? No.
Did we make meaningless motions designed to delay and frustrate our opponents? No.
We sat there and took it. That's what sane people do in a caucus/convention type setting when they are simply outnumbered by the opposition. In the case of the Louisiana GOP establishment, what you do when you are out voted at a convention is change the rules, have people arrested and act generally like a bunch of fools.

And apparently when you are Mike Bayham, you write a blog post defending the fools and accusing those with the real gumption to participate in large numbers of being thieves and deceitful.

Woe to him who calls good evil and evil good.

Roger Hill said...


Some of the 'tactics' used by Paul supporters are not premeditated... they are reactions to being denied their due.

Before the State convention, I obviously attended the county caucus. Our caucus was actually a re-do caucus, the first being completely subverted by the GOP establishment in my home county. When it was obvious that they did not have enough votes for their pre-approved candidates (Santorum or Romney... actually, anyone but Paul) they proceeded to nominate, elect and install their own hand picked people, regardless of the shouts from the floor. The room was so overwhelmingly appalled by their behavior that the caucus could not continue and was shut down by the establishment and we were told to leave or be arrested. When we tried to re-convene the caucus outside, some of us were arrested!

To top it all off, when the re-do caucus took place (thanks to the working of the State level GOP) we did win the day... but the Santorum/Romney supporters were whining like it was a cheese convention. One man got up and asked Paul backers how they would feel if they were outnumbered and had the majority deny them any delegates. I could only laugh! We were in the MAJORITY at the first caucus and were denied by the minority present! That is what causes all the so called 'meaningless motions' and 'tactics' you complain about. It is perfectly rational for people to cry foul when they smell the cooking cabbage that is the GOP establishment.

CreoleGenius said...

Bayham; is your last name like the ham cured with bay leaf and lots of corn syrup? You certainly are a fat one. Do they feed you lots of corn? You are almost completely bald. They say that has to do with excess cholesterol. And ugly. Don't you grow tusks, you big boar? Did your dentist remove them with your wisdom teeth? Was your mom that fat? You sure type a lot of words. Do you oink when you speak them? Were you a cop before you entered this line of work? Do you eat shit from the bottom of your pen?

John said...

Gee Creole Genius, you don't sound like a Ron Paul supporter. In fact, your comments are so vitriolic, I wonder if they were perhaps made by someone sympathetic to Mr. Bayham to make Ron Paul supporters look rude and uncultered.