She’s right.<\/em><\/strong>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tSuit une tentative d’explication de ce labyrinthe kafka\u00efen qu’est la processus des primaires, et qui joue un r\u00f4le essentiel cette ann\u00e9e \u00e0 cause de l’intensit\u00e9 de la situation, de la pr\u00e9sence ent\u00eat\u00e9e de Ron Paul et du refus d’aucun des quatre candidat d’abandonner. Ce dernier point permet en effet au labyrinthe de donner tous ses effets.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00ab[T]he process is not that simple. A popular vote is held, but it’s really no more than a preference poll or straw poll. After the straw poll is closed, a series of meetings commence in which delegates are elected from a precinct, district or county, which then elect delegates to a state convention, which then elect the delegates to represent that state at the RNC. This process typically takes months after the straw poll is over and the resulting delegates for each candidate may bear little resemblance to the vote percentage that candidate won in the straw poll.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbPaul’s campaign believes that his supporters, typically more enthusiastic and devoted to his candidacy, are more likely to remain after the straw poll and participate in the delegate selection process. There is some evidence that they are correct. For example, the Iowa Republican Party confirms that delegate assignment has nothing to do with the straw poll and that Paul may secure the most delegates from Iowa.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbImplicit in much of the coverage of the delegate selection process is that it somehow disenfranchises those who only vote in the straw poll. Not so. All Republican Party members have an equal opportunity to become delegates. That they choose not to merely reflects their level of commitment to their candidate.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbNor does the process render the straw poll meaningless. Its purpose is to inform those seeking a delegate slot what the majority of voters in their state prefer. This can have profound influence on how they eventually vote in the ensuing conventions. A delegate may initially support Mitt Romney, but change his or her mind after learning that a majority of voters in their state, including independents or Democrats in some states, preferred Rick Santorum.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tR\u00e9sultat (pour le moment) ?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\t\u00abSo how many delegates does Ron Paul or any of the other candidates have? No one knows. There are some delegates that are bound to vote for primary winners during the first round at the RNC, but that’s all that has been decided. Hundreds of other delegates in states that have already held their primaries\/caucuses are still up for grabs. First in the nation Iowa is actually last in the nation to select its delegates. That won’t happen until June.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n\t\u00bbAt the end of the process, the delegates from each state will meet at the RNC and an initial vote will be taken. If after that vote no candidate has the 1,144 delegates necessary to secure the nomination, a brokered convention begins. Paul reminded Leno that under those circumstances, even bound delegates from primary states become unbound and can vote their conscience. Paul believes he has a real shot to win in that scenario.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tEn d’autres termes, et si la campagne continue comme elle se fait actuellement, l’hypoth\u00e8se principale est qu’il y aurait effectivement une situation de blocage \u00e0 Tampa, en Floride, lors de la convention du parti r\u00e9publicain, en ao\u00fbt prochain. (Cette situation d’inconnaissance objective explique notamment que les rumeurs et les pressions continuent \u00e0 aller bon train sur un accord secret Paul-Romney pour que le premier se d\u00e9siste en faveur du second \u00e0 l’issie de la campagne, en \u00e9change de l’une ou l’autre concession. Ron Paul d\u00e9ment r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement ces affirmations comme une manuvre du Syst\u00e8me, m\u00eame si certains des dirigeants de sa campagne se laissent parfois aller \u00e0 \u00e9voquer l’hypoth\u00e8se, ce qui pose un r\u00e9el probl\u00e8me de coh\u00e9sion, voire de loyaut\u00e9, \u00e0 l’int\u00e9rieur du camp Ron Paul.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tSi cette situation de blocage r\u00e9siste aux manuvres, on peut envisager l’hypoth\u00e8se extr\u00eame d’un d\u00e9sordre complet, aboutissant \u00e0 des positions antagonistes aussi puissantes l’une que l’autre, \u00e0 une majorit\u00e9-surprise de Paul, etc., et \u00e0 un champ ouvert \u00e0 l’affrontement. En effet, on peut tenir comme raisonnablement acquis deux facteurs extr\u00eames et totalement antagonistes : le refus de Ron Paul d’un compromis du genre \u00e9voqu\u00e9, qui r\u00e9duirait \u00e0 rien son programme radical ; le refus sans aucune nuance de l’establishment<\/em> du parti d’une nomination de Ron Paul comme candidat r\u00e9publicain. Tous ces cas, qui semblent ne pas \u00eatre impensables du tout, conduisent \u00e0 des probabilit\u00e9s de rupture et de scission \u00e0 l’int\u00e9rieur du parti, \u00e0 la convention elle-m\u00eame ; la violence de l’\u00e9v\u00e9nement r\u00e9duirait \u00e0 rien les effets des manuvres en coulisse. On en conclura sobrement que, dans ce contexte, la perspective des \u00e9lections pr\u00e9sidentielles US restent ouvertes \u00e0 un d\u00e9sordre consid\u00e9rable, qui pourrait \u00eatre dans le meilleur des cas un d\u00e9sordre destructeur des processus du Syst\u00e8me, c’est-\u00e0-dire objectivement un d\u00e9sordre cr\u00e9ateur.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 24 mars 2012 \u00e0 06H18<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Les choses vues d’Europe, le Syst\u00e8me peut dormir sur ses deux oreilles. Les primaires du parti r\u00e9publicain ont quasiment tranch\u00e9 en faveur de Mitt Romney, candidat standard et st\u00e9r\u00e9otype du Syst\u00e8me qui sera bien l’adversaire d’Obama. (La victoire d\u00e9cisive de Romney dans l’Illinois, d\u00e9crite comme lui assurant sa nomination, comme par exemple selon le Guardian… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[9861,7423,14723,14627,3356,14671,11201,14722,7098,3140,3310,14721],"class_list":["post-74598","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-caucus","tag-convention","tag-creacteur","tag-delegues","tag-desordre","tag-destructeur","tag-inconnaissance","tag-maddows","tag-mullen","tag-paul","tag-ron","tag-tampa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74598","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74598"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74598\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74598"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74598"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74598"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}