Talk:Republican National Convention

message: This article seems to be missing the most basic info.  I was referred to this article  by a couple friends who send they spent lots of time on wikipedia (on my recomendation)  to find out how the republican presidential candidate is chosen.   They failed to find this out.  Looking at this article I can se why.  Does a delegate equal a vote?  Rumor has it that the candidate is actually chosen by people behind closed doors not by the people voting.  Indeed I just saw a special on the news about the states primaries and they said all those votes were "non binding"  ie don't count. 
Furthermore, under the example calculations section, it still says Wyoming voted for McCain, instead of the more recent Romney, in giving the voting bonus.
I suggest someone who actually knows should rewrite or at least add to this artcile.  They should imagiune being and average person and answer the questions an average person mught have:
What is the ppurpose of the convention?
How is the candidate chosen?
What are delegates?
How are they chosen?
etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Texxs (talk • contribs) 17:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Basic Info Missing

message: I like the format of the Democratic National Convention page better (e.g., including the List of Conventions within the page instead of on its own). Anyone object to making them match, specifically by making this one match the Demo page? - Jeff Worthington 20:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know why they're separated. No immediate objections come to mind on my part at the moment. Settler 01:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, now that the List of Republican National Conventions article has been improved, I'm removing the list from this article. I originally inserted it shortly after the comment of mine I'm replying to. Settler (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with the OP. If someone can change it that would be great. Lajolla2009 (talk) 08:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Format

message: :It was the convention where NBC News correspondent John Chancellor (who would later helm the :NBC Nightly News) refused to cede his spot on the floor for a group of young Goldwater :supporters, finally signed off when security personnel arrived with: "I've been promised bail, :ladies and gentlemen, by my office. This is John Chancellor, somewhere in custody."
This is an interesting incident, but doesn't seem very encyclopedic, especially considering the size of the whole article. 66.27.78.65 (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: John Chancellor Incident

message: This page has obviously been vandalized. This needs to be corrected and preventative actions taken. 65.247.230.10 (talk) 00:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: The formula to calculate the number of delegates only works for 50 of the 56 states and other areas with a primary by the republicans. 
Virginia has 49 delegates but by the rules of formula is should be 50.  3 (rnc) + 33 (11 rep x 3) + 10 (state) + 1 (gov) + 1 (majority Rep) + 2 (majority both state leg) = 50. 
Vermont and Delaware both have 17 but should have 16, 3 (rnc)  + 10 (state) + 3 (1 rep x3) =16, same with Hawaii who have 20 but should have 19, 3 (rnc) + 10 (state) + 6 (2 rep x 3). 
And Arizona and New Hampshire, also don't add up. Arizona have 58 delegates with a 29 penalty, but I can only count for 54, 3 (rnc) + 24 (8 rep x 3) + 10 (state) + 11 (4.5 + (10 x 0.60 = 6) = 10.5 won in 08) + 1 (gov) + 2 (both senators) + 1 (majority rep) + 2 (majority both state leg) = 54 not 58. 
And New Hampshire have 24 delegates minus 12 penalty, but should have 23 delegates, 3 (rnc) + 6 (2 rep x 3) +10 (state) + 1 (senator) + 2 (majority rep) + 2 (majority both state leg) = 23 not 24.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.64.90.148 (talk) 23:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The number's don't add up 

message: It is common in Wikipedia to have articles comparing stuff. I was wondering if maybe we could workout an article called Comparison between the Republic National Convention and the Democratic National Convention. This comparison may be ideological and technical. For instance it could show the readers some statistics regarding for instance the amount of delegates that  belong to a minority, or women vs men in each convention etc. Thanks --Camilo Sánchez Talk to me 16:01, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison

message: This is a great Wall Street Journal article that serves up to the convention.
 Headline-1: The Path to a Presidential Nomination
* http://graphics.wsj.com/elections/2016/the-path-to-a-presidential-nomination/
QUOTE: "Some 2,472 delegates will attend the Republican National Convention to select the presidential nominee. The winner must carry 1,237—half of the total, plus one. But the first contests are more about building credibility and momentum than winning delegates." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credentialing 

message: I deleted a section on the police handling of a couple of specific protests, based on it being off-topic and dated (it referred to an upcoming 2012 election, and it sounded like a police/crowd management problem). I also added links to the "brokered convention" page, which was the info I came here looking for.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nlspiegel (talk • contribs) 18:11, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits made 

message: I think the Wyoming calculation is wrong, but I could easily be missing some minutiae in the rules.  Wyoming has 3 electors, not 1 (two senators and a congressman).  Since it went with Mitt Romney, shouldn't it have 4.5 (supporting Mitt Romney) plus 1.8 (3 electors * .6) = 6.3, which is raised to 7, since they take the ceiling of any fraction. --Bertrc (talk) 21:03, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Dlíodóir95 seems to have agreed with me and has made the fix.  Thanks. --Bertrc (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

text: Bertrc No worries. I noticed this the other day and thought it was a bit strange considering that the examples for Texas and California had the same method of calculation using 60% of the electors, rather than 60% of the Congressmen as had been used for Wyoming, so I decided to correct it. Thanks for flagging this up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlíodóir95 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't Wyoming get 7 delegates under presidential support?  60% of ''3'' plus 4.5 

message: The following paragraph in the first section of the Republican National Convention is out of place: 
"In case of a brokered convention, Rule 40a of the 2016 convention rules states that a candidate must have the support of a majority of the delegates of at least eight states in order to get the nomination.[2] On the first ballot, delegates from all states and territories except Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam and a few from Louisiana must vote for the candidate who won their support on the day of their state's primary or caucus. On the second ballot, 55 percent of a state's delegates are free to vote for whomever they want. By the third ballot, 85 percent of all the delegates are free agents.[3][better source needed]"
This paragraph cites a specific rule change that occurred in 2012 and does not belong in the general summary.  Adding the paragraph into the end of the summary in such a specific way diverts from the organization of the page. The rule change in question additionally poses only a theoretical outcome on the current RNC, given that different rules are adopted at each convention. This content should be removed and revised into a different or new subsection, and cleaned up. most of the information provided in last paragraph is unsourced. Perhaps a subsection discussing process of adopting rules at each Convention would be appropriate.  
I have removed paragraph changes previously revised by Zzyzx11 (talk) , and recommend any previous convention rules to be updated in the history subsection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.169.83.233 (talk) 20:47, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objections to the complete removal of that paragraph that was originally started by the editor before me, and I tried to make some compromise edits to accommodate. Zzyzx11 (talk) 08:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Summary contains details that do not belong in the summarization of the Republican National Convention 

message: Ted Cruz and others point out the difference:
* Contested (or open) Convention:  Delegates vote until a winner emerges (assuming not secured on first ballot.)
* Brokered Convention: The RNC members (not delegates) decide who should be the noninee.
As you can surmize, there is a vast difference, and our article is wrong. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 00:33, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You are totally wrong, Charles, about the meaning of a "brokered" convention; indeed, your definition is the reverse of the meaning of the term. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

text: A contested convention means is one in which no candidate is a presumptive nominee heading into the convention. A brokered convention is one which lasts multiple ballots. SecretName101 (talk) 07:41, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong definitions in the article