Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on May 03, 2012, 08:08:04 PM
-
Doesn't sound like a very good strategy.
Paul campaign has new tactic to win delegates, hijack GOP convention
Published May 03, 2012
FoxNews.com
Despite Ron Paul having essentially no shot at winning the GOP presidential nomination, his renegade campaign has embarked on a new tactic that his supporters hope can get the Texas congressmen elected – or at least get him a larger role at the party convention and cause headaches for likely nominee Mitt Romney.
The Paul campaign is attempting to secure convention-bound delegates in district- and state-level contests to vote for their candidate, though Paul has failed to win a single primary or caucus.
Primary math typically adds up to the winner getting the most delegates, which puts Romney far ahead of Paul.
However, Paul campaigners think a strong presence at state-level contests could help them influence and win enough remaining delegates to help their candidate perhaps win a brokered nomination at the national convention, should Romney not get enough votes in the first round. It at least could get Paul more attention for his tiny-government platform.
“Our campaign strategy has always been to amass the maximum amount of delegates possible, and continuing work in state caucus-conventions is part of that,” Paul spokesman Gary Howard said Thursday.
Even so, some Republican strategists say such tactics are hurting the party and its efforts to unify for the general election.
“The bottom line is any attempt to gather more delegates (for Paul) is not likely to yield success,” said Taylor Griffin, a GOP strategist at the Washington, D.C.-based Hamilton Place Strategies. “The only person it’s going to help is Barack Obama.”
This weekend, the Paul campaign appears to be eyeing 25 delegates up for grabs at the GOP convention in Nevada, where Romney won the state caucus with roughly 50 percent of the vote in February.
The notion that the Paul campaign might try to tinker with the Nevada delegate count has prompted the Republican National Committee’s top lawyer to send a letter to the Nevada state party.
Chief counsel John R. Phillippe Jr. told party Chairman Michael McDonald on Wednesday that such maneuvering could result in the entire Nevada delegation not getting seated at the convention.
Phillippe made clear the letter was “purely advisory” but said it was “highly likely” that a committee with jurisdiction over these matters might find such changes improper.
In Iowa, Paul could win a chunk of the 28 delegates available next month at the district-state convention, after finishing third and receiving just one delegate in the January caucus.
Last week, Paul dominated the Louisiana state caucus, though he won just 6 percent of the primary vote, and he could do the same at the June 2 state convention.
Paul campaigners also appear to be focusing on at least three other states – including Maine, Massachusetts and Washington – which could give them enough delegates to at least make some noise on the convention floor.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/03/paul-campaign-has-new-tactic-to-win-delegates-highjack-gop-convention/
-
I still prefer Ron paul over myth 8 days a week. If he can get himself on the ticket or get a spot as treasury sec or F'ed chairman good for him.
-
Highjack? Lol, you are good for a laugh BB. The real threats go right over your head while you treat anything to do with Paul like it's the plague.
-
You have to be one hell of a dumbshit to write or post garbage like this...
hijack... renegade campaign? ::)
Fucking Morons.
-
Highjack? Lol, you are good for a laugh BB. The real threats go right over your head while you treat anything to do with Paul like it's the plague.
No worries. You always make me laugh too. :)
-
You have to be one hell of a dumbshit to write or post garbage like this...
hijack... renegade campaign? ::)
Fucking Morons.
hahah!!!!
Even goofier to re-post this garbage.... hahah
-
Beach Bum suffers from Paul-o-phobia.
-
Beach Bum suffers from Paul-o-phobia.
lol. Is that the same as being a Paultard, or is that something else?
-
lol. Is that the same as being a Paultard, or is that something else?
Yeah, its the equal and opposite effect.
-
Paultard: Very vocal defender of the Constitution. Shame Shame ::)
Neocon: Evil power tripping sith like jerkoffs who don't give a rat's ass about the constitution.
I guess I don't mind being called a Paultard :) Sure better than being a neocon... beach bum...
-
How about Paulbot? Seems to fit. :)
Paulbot
Someone suffering from an obnoxious personality disorder which causes them to endlessly scan online discussions for mentions of Ron Paul and then descend on those discussions with hostile invective and over the top praise for Dr. Paul, accompanied with various rude behavior including shouting down disagreement and accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being a fascist. Often characterized by not actually understanding the principles of libertarianism, the political positions of Ron Paul, or how to make any kind of effective argument for their positions. Despite being real people they have been called 'bots' because their comments often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam.
"Invective"? Check.
"Various rude behavior"? Check.
Not able "to make any kind of effective argument for their positions"? Check.
Comments that "often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam"? Check.
-
god, that sounds bad and it's still 100 times better than being a neocon...
-
What about the actual issue of Ron Paul trying to hijack the convention? Aside from the problems like Nevada delegates not being seated at the GOP Convention, isn't this undemocratic?
If by some miracle he was able to become the nominee through Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering, it would be contrary to the votes of the 50 states that didn't vote for him. (I'm assuming he will not win any of the remaining 8 primaries/caucuses, after losing the first 42.) That's democracy?
-
I'm not really sure this counts as hijacking...but I don't see it happening anyway. At least not on a large of enough scale to matter.
Paul's better than Romney though and IMO, just what the country needs at this point in time. Another time, meh...
-
I'm not really sure this counts as hijacking...but I don't see it happening anyway. At least not on a large of enough scale to matter.
Paul's better than Romney though and IMO, just what the country needs at this point in time. Another time, meh...
Cant fight the establishment youve aligned yourself with and expect to win, methinks..
-
What about the actual issue of Ron Paul trying to hijack the convention? Aside from the problems like Nevada delegates not being seated at the GOP Convention, isn't this undemocratic?
If by some miracle he was able to become the nominee through Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering, it would be contrary to the votes of the 50 states that didn't vote for him. (I'm assuming he will not win any of the remaining 8 primaries/caucuses, after losing the first 42.) That's democracy?
You didn't mind when Bush was elected after losing the popular vote.
-
You didn't mind when Bush was elected after losing the popular vote.
Not a good comparison. Bush won the majority of votes in states with enough delegates to win 270.
If you look at the popular votes Ron Paul has received, he's in last place by a lot:
Romney - 5,228,676
Santorum - 3,376,818
Gingrich - 2,403,826
Paul - 1,335,822
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html
Him getting the nomination while not winning a single state and finishing last in the popular vote isn't similar to Bush/Gore. Paul being the nominee would be like the electoral college electing Carter after Reagan killed him in both the popular vote and delegate count.
-
What about the actual issue of Ron Paul trying to hijack the convention? Aside from the problems like Nevada delegates not being seated at the GOP Convention, isn't this undemocratic?
If by some miracle he was able to become the nominee through Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering, it would be contrary to the votes of the 50 states that didn't vote for him. (I'm assuming he will not win any of the remaining 8 primaries/caucuses, after losing the first 42.) That's democracy?
God, you are an idiot.
Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering? He's playing by the rules you dope.
Its the RNC that's breaking its own rules, but you don't seem to have any issues with that. You are about as dense as they come.
-
God, you are an idiot.
Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering? He's playing by the rules you dope.
Its the RNC that's breaking its own rules, but you don't seem to have any issues with that. You are about as dense as they come.
Ah yes. Typical Paulbot. "Invective"? Check.
"Various rude behavior"? Check.
Not able "to make any kind of effective argument for their positions"? Check.
Comments that "often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam"? Check.
-
Ah yes. Typical Paulbot. "Invective"? Check.
"Various rude behavior"? Check.
Not able "to make any kind of effective argument for their positions"? Check.
Comments that "often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam"? Check.
"Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering"
Like I said, you're an idiot.
-
I will vote for myth over Obama , but my heart and soul is still w Ron Paul.
-
"Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering"
Like I said, you're an idiot.
I understand Paulbot. You can't discuss the facts. They're too inconvenient. Now run along and post more pictures of Ron Paul crowds, talk about the media conspiracy against Ron Paul, talk about the "revolution" (lol), etc.
-
No
-
God, you are an idiot.
Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering? He's playing by the rules you dope.
Its the RNC that's breaking its own rules, but you don't seem to have any issues with that. You are about as dense as they come.
Good video, I saw that the other night!
-
Good video, I saw that the other night!
Imagine, a reporter that actually does his job.
-
Ah yes. Typical Paulbot. "Invective"? Check.
"Various rude behavior"? Check.
Not able "to make any kind of effective argument for their positions"? Check.
Comments that "often have the non sequitur like quality of computer generated spam"? Check.
I think this is absolutely hilarious because you've just described yourself, and the way you've behaved around here for years!
;D
-
BeachBum, remember when I told you about this and you vehemently denied it? Ron Paul is winning in states such as Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, and others, because his voters realize that the non-binding straw poll preceding the actual caucusing is useless.
-
What about the actual issue of Ron Paul trying to hijack the convention?
There's no "hijacking" going on. This is how the system is supposed to work. You field delegates in the caucuses and your supporters vote for them. It's republicanism at it's finest.
Aside from the problems like Nevada delegates not being seated at the GOP Convention, isn't this undemocratic?
What is undemocratic about having a series of elections to determine the delegates?
If by some miracle he was able to become the nominee through Obama/Chicago politician-style maneuvering
Ground swell of grassroots supporters = Chicago-style maneuvering??!??
it would be contrary to the votes of the 50 states that didn't vote for him. (I'm assuming he will not win any of the remaining 8 primaries/caucuses, after losing the first 42.) That's democracy?
Uhmm, they clearly did vote for him if he was able to get his delegates through the caucuses. The difference is his supporters understood that the real voting doesn't begin till after the non-binding straw polls which you claimed were, in fact, binding in a different thread and threw a hissyfit when I explained to you that they are in fact non-binding and do not determine the allocation of state delegates to the national convention.
-
BTW, I wasn't able to make it, but I hear the Wayne County Conventions (here in MI) were a success. Got Ron Paul people placed as delegates and alternates. If all the other counties did their jobs well, then the Ron Paul supporters will have significant impact on the party platform AND they'll be able to elect Ron Paul President if there's a brokered convention.
-
I understand Paulbot. You can't discuss the facts. They're too inconvenient. Now run along and post more pictures of Ron Paul crowds, talk about the media conspiracy against Ron Paul, talk about the "revolution" (lol), etc.
If you thought BB was on this forum for the sole purpose of annoying the holy fucking hell out of you... you were right.
-
Uhmm, they clearly did vote for him if he was able to get his delegates through the caucuses. The difference is his supporters understood that the real voting doesn't begin till after the non-binding straw polls which you claimed were, in fact, binding in a different thread and threw a hissyfit when I explained to you that they are in fact non-binding and do not determine the allocation of state delegates to the national convention.
Like I said, he's as dense as they come. He's not malicious but damn...sometimes its like trying to reason with a four year old when it comes to this process. Yet, he turns a completely blind eye to the open corruption of the party.
He calls us conspiracy theorists but doesn't have the slightest desire to check out most of the articles or videos I post of legit individuals doing proper investigations into the delegate process and how the GOP is trying its best to fuck over Paul and his supporters by any means necessary. Any normal human being would be disgusted. I can understand he may not like Paul or some of his more radical supporters but that's besides the point, it's the corruption and underhanded tactics that should have everyone concerned.But no, he pisses and moans about people following the rules and calls it "hijacking". ::)
-
Like I said, he's as dense as they come. He's not malicious but damn...sometimes its like trying to reason with a four year old when it comes to this process. Yet, he turns a completely blind eye to the open corruption of the party.
He calls us conspiracy theorists but doesn't have the slightest desire to check out most of the articles or videos I post of legit individuals doing proper investigations into the delegate process and how the GOP is trying its best to fuck over Paul and his supporters by any means necessary. Any normal human being would be disgusted. I can understand he may not like Paul or some of his more radical supporters but that's besides the point, it's the corruption and underhanded tactics that should have everyone concerned.But no, he pisses and moans about people following the rules and calls it "hijacking". ::)
When someone doesnt want to recognize something, they wont. No matter how much info you give them, they will simply flat out ignore it and tell you your crazy.
Thats just psyche 101, people see what they want to see.
-
When someone doesnt want to recognize something, they wont. No matter how much info you give them, they will simply flat out ignore it and tell you your crazy.
Thats just psyche 101, people see what they want to see.
Personally, I just find it hilarious that I PROVED it to him that this is happening now AS PER CAUCUS RULES, and now he's bitching about it as if it's some new revelation and calling it "hijacking." ::)
BTW, best example of this happening is Missouri. Ron Paul finished dead last in that state with 5% of the vote when Santorum had his "hat trick." Of course, RP didn't campaign there and his supporters didn't go vote because they realized that it was a non-binding straw poll. When the REAL voting started in the caucuses, they smoked the whole thing. Of course, now the GOP is furiously mad that their golden boy, the far-left progressive Mitt Romney who doesn't have a plan to balance the budget, is opposed to a flat tax or even reduced taxes (after all, his tax plan is revenue neutral because it will allegedly replace various credits and deductions with lower rates), and has taken every side of every social issue from abortion to gay marriage, is getting his ass kicked by Ron Paul in these various caucuses. For example, check out this letter from the Establishment GOP to the grassroots:
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g83/derdy01/Letter.jpg)
Why is the Establishment GOP challenging the St. Charles Caucus delegation? Because Ron Paul won it, fair and square. Right now, the Establishment GOP is working overtime to sink the campaign of the ONE and ONLY true conservative and constitutionalist who will stick to small-r republican principles, Ron Paul. But the Establishment is dead set on proceeding with the coronation of the Big Government RINO Mitt Romney.
-
If you thought BB was on this forum for the sole purpose of annoying the holy fucking hell out of you... you were right.
Hahahahahahahahahhahaha. Reading that caused me to choke on my cereal!!
-
I think this is absolutely hilarious because you've just described yourself, and the way you've behaved around here for years!
;D
Why thank you. :) And here is the sum total of the contribution to the board by you and your 25 gimmicks:
-
BeachBum, remember when I told you about this and you vehemently denied it? Ron Paul is winning in states such as Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, and others, because his voters realize that the non-binding straw poll preceding the actual caucusing is useless.
I don't remember "vehement" denials. What I remember telling you is the the person who gets to 1144 after winning the necessary number of states will be the nominee. And that's exactly what's going to happen.
-
There's no "hijacking" going on. This is how the system is supposed to work. You field delegates in the caucuses and your supporters vote for them. It's republicanism at it's finest.
What is undemocratic about having a series of elections to determine the delegates?
Ground swell of grassroots supporters = Chicago-style maneuvering??!??
Uhmm, they clearly did vote for him if he was able to get his delegates through the caucuses. The difference is his supporters understood that the real voting doesn't begin till after the non-binding straw polls which you claimed were, in fact, binding in a different thread and threw a hissyfit when I explained to you that they are in fact non-binding and do not determine the allocation of state delegates to the national convention.
It's undemocratic to have a person run in 50 primaries/caucuses, lose every single one, finish dead last in the popular vote, but still "win" at the end of the day. That candidate would not be who the people wanted or voted for.
That is the Obama-like Chicago-style maneuvering. Do you know how he was elected in Illinois?
Can you link me to the "hissyfit"? My memory is failing me. ::)
What I recall telling you is I know exactly how the process works. I also tried to explain history to you and how the nominee who wins 1144 will be the nominee. There is no way delegates are going to upset the apple cart. We're talking about happens, practically speaking, in every election.
I also tried to explain to you that this is no different than the electoral college, which isn't required to elect the president in accordance with either the popular vote or the number of delegates won during the election. But they always follow the election's outcome and elect the person who won 270. That's the reality.
And the reality regarding Ron Paul is he isn't going to win squat. He was never a viable candidate. He was a never a contender. He's not going to be elected president. Romney will be the nominee.
-
When someone doesnt want to recognize something, they wont. No matter how much info you give them, they will simply flat out ignore it and tell you your crazy.
Thats just psyche 101, people see what they want to see.
Truth.
-
Beach Bum scurrying to recover!!!! ;D
-
It's undemocratic to have a person run in 50 primaries/caucuses, lose every single one, finish dead last in the popular vote, but still "win" at the end of the day. That candidate would not be who the people wanted or voted for.
It's not undemocratic for the candidate who comes out on top in the well-defined and understood process to win delegates who will then go the party's national convention.
That is the Obama-like Chicago-style maneuvering. Do you know how he was elected in Illinois?
You are honestly equating someone winning a binding caucus to "maneuvering"? Shit, what's not maneuvering according to you? Hiring Miss Cleo and handing her an Ouija board perhaps?
What I recall telling you is I know exactly how the process works.
Clearly you don't if you call what's happening "maneuvering."
I also tried to explain to you that this is no different than the electoral college, which isn't required to elect the president in accordance with either the popular vote or the number of delegates won during the election. But they always follow the election's outcome and elect the person who won 270. That's the reality.
If they didn't, would that be "maneuvering" or would that be perfectly legal, according to the rules established for the Electoral College?
-
It's not undemocratic for the candidate who comes out on top in the well-defined and understood process to win delegates who will then go the party's national convention.
You are honestly equating someone winning a binding caucus to "maneuvering"? Shit, what's not maneuvering according to you? Hiring Miss Cleo and handing her an Ouija board perhaps?
Clearly you don't if you call what's happening "maneuvering."
If they didn't, would that be "maneuvering" or would that be perfectly legal, according to the rules established for the Electoral College?
Dont bother, he has his own narrow view of the process and thats that.
-
It's not undemocratic for the candidate who comes out on top in the well-defined and understood process to win delegates who will then go the party's national convention.
You are honestly equating someone winning a binding caucus to "maneuvering"? Shit, what's not maneuvering according to you? Hiring Miss Cleo and handing her an Ouija board perhaps?
Clearly you don't if you call what's happening "maneuvering."
If they didn't, would that be "maneuvering" or would that be perfectly legal, according to the rules established for the Electoral College?
You can make the same statement about Jimmy Carter being elected president by the electoral college, in a "well-defined and understood process," and it still wouldn't be very democratic.
Yes, I'm equating what Ron Paul is trying to do with what Obama did in Illinois. Both were legal.
In any event, this is primarily message board material because he's not going to be the nominee.
-
Dont bother, he has his own narrow view of the process and thats that.
My narrow view of the process is the guy who wins the most votes during the primary/caucus season and gets the the required number of delegates (1144 this year) always wins, that's the way it should be, and that's exactly what will happen in a few weeks.
-
My narrow view of the process is the guy who wins the most votes during the primary/caucus season and gets the the required number of delegates (1144 this year) always wins, that's the way it should be, and that's exactly what will happen in a few weeks.
How are you arguing this when Bush lost the popular vote but still won the presidency? Essentially youre arguing against yourself, it seems. (I voted for Bush twice, FYI)
-
How are you arguing this when Bush lost the popular vote but still won the presidency? Essentially youre arguing against yourself, it seems. (I voted for Bush twice, FYI)
Because Bush won a majority of votes in enough states to secure 270 delegates. He actually beat Gore in the popular vote in a number of states. Carter/Reagan is a better example (losing almost every primary, losing the popular vote, then being elected president by the electoral college).
No comparison at all to what Ron Paul is trying to do.
-
Because Bush won a majority of votes in enough states to secure 270 delegates. He actually beat Gore in the popular vote in a number of states. Carter/Reagan is a better example (losing almost every primary, losing the popular vote, then being elected president by the electoral college).
No comparison at all to what Ron Paul is trying to do.
He's trying to work a system set in place, just like either of those examples, under the rules.
He's not breaking any rules.
He's not defrauding anyone.
He's just educating his supporters what it takes to WIN an election and taking advantage of rules rarely used (and rarely taught because normally one doesnt have to fight their own party. Usually one's party doesnt pre-pick their candidate and marginalize another to nonethingness intentionally to keep them out of the race, either).
As long as he breaks no rules, I see no problem with what he does.
The way I see it, they want to keep him out of the media, want to do whatever they can to sabotage his campaign, he has every right to use every available method (as long as its in line with the rules) to give him a shot at winning.
At least he's following the rules. The party trying to keep him down doesnt seem to care about breaking or re-writing them to fuck him over.
-
He's trying to work a system set in place, just like either of those examples, under the rules.
He's not breaking any rules.
He's not defrauding anyone.
He's just educating his supporters what it takes to WIN an election and taking advantage of rules rarely used (and rarely taught because normally one doesnt have to fight their own party. Usually one's party doesnt pre-pick their candidate and marginalize another to nonethingness intentionally to keep them out of the race, either).
As long as he breaks no rules, I see no problem with what he does.
The way I see it, they want to keep him out of the media, want to do whatever they can to sabotage his campaign, he has every right to use every available method (as long as its in line with the rules) to give him a shot at winning.
At least he's following the rules. The party trying to keep him down doesnt seem to care about breaking or re-writing them to fuck him over.
I never said he was breaking any rules.
You would have had no problem with the electoral college electing Jimmy Carter as president over Reagan?
-
I never said he was breaking any rules.
You would have had no problem with the electoral college electing Jimmy Carter as president over Reagan?
If he found a way to do it, no.
On a personal level, yes of course I would be mad Reagan lost. But if he did it under the rules, then what can you do?
-
If he found a way to do it, no.
On a personal level, yes of course I would be mad Reagan lost. But if he did it under the rules, then what can you do?
I'd have a huge problem with it. Just like I'd have a problem if any majority in the House or Senate used the filibuster to block any measure from proceeding, or any judge or other nominee from getting confirmed, etc. It would be within the rules, but wrong.
It's never going to happen, but for the sake of message board discussion, if it worked it would disenfranchise millions of voters. You would think Ron Paul, who supposedly is all for "liberty," would not be trying to essentially overturn the will of the voters.
As I've said before, his support is a mile wide and an inch thick. That's why he couldn't win a single primary or caucus.
-
You can make the same statement about Jimmy Carter being elected president by the electoral college, in a "well-defined and understood process," and it still wouldn't be very democratic.
We don't have a democracy, we have a republic. There's a difference and you may want to ask yourself what it is one day.
-
We don't have a democracy, we have a republic. There's a difference and you may want to ask yourself what it is one day.
Thanks for clearing that up. ::)
-
Thanks for clearing that up. ::)
You're welcome. ;)
-
You're welcome. ;)
Lol
-
Paul wins majority of delegates from Maine GOP
Associated Press ^ | 5/6/12 | Glenn Adams
Posted on May 6, 2012 6:44:53 PM EDT by SmithL
AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) -- With Mitt Romney's nomination all but decided, Ron Paul supporters wrested control of the Maine Republican Convention and elected a majority slate supporting the Texas congressman to the GOP national convention, party officials said as the two-day convention neared its end Sunday. The results gave the Texas congressman a late state victory.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
-
Paul wins majority of delegates from Maine GOP
Associated Press ^ | 5/6/12 | Glenn Adams
Posted on May 6, 2012 6:44:53 PM EDT by SmithL
AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) -- With Mitt Romney's nomination all but decided, Ron Paul supporters wrested control of the Maine Republican Convention and elected a majority slate supporting the Texas congressman to the GOP national convention, party officials said as the two-day convention neared its end Sunday. The results gave the Texas congressman a late state victory.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Win.
-
Ron Paul supporters capture majority of Nevada’s national delegates
Las Vegas Sun ^ | 05/06/2012 | By Anjeanette Damon
Posted on May 6, 2012 8:07:18 PM EDT by redreno
Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul captured the majority of Nevada’s national delegates early Sunday, overwhelming likely nominee Mitt Romney with an organized contingent who easily took control of the state convention.
Paul’s supporters won 22 of the 25 national delegate slots up for election at the state convention in Sparks on Saturday. Romney won three.
Another three automatic delegates are expected to support Romney, meaning Romney will have six supporters in the delegation and Paul will have 22.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
-
d
-
It's undemocratic to have a person run in 50 primaries/caucuses, lose every single one, finish dead last in the popular vote, but still "win" at the end of the day. That candidate would not be who the people wanted or voted for.
True, it would be very undemocratic.
I'm at a crossroads though of thinking that him getting in, even if sneaky, may be the best thing. But, maybe I'm just being a self-righteous douchebag. If it's the people's will to keep him out...so be it.
-
True, it would be very undemocratic.
I'm at a crossroads though of thinking that him getting in, even if sneaky, may be the best thing. But, maybe I'm just being a self-righteous douchebag. If it's the people's will to keep him out...so be it.
The trash at the Repub establishment set the rules for the primary which favored mittens and if Paul can use those rules to get in or get what he wants so be it.
-
The trash at the Repub establishment set the rules for the primary which favored mittens and if Paul can use those rules to get in or get what he wants so be it.
Thats the way I look at it.
The establishment is rewriting the rules or breaking them to keep him out, im gonna laugh my fucking ass off if he uses their own rules to win.
-
Ron Paul Could Still Win Enough Delegates To Deny Mitt Romney The Republican Nomination
The American Dream ^ | 5/7/2012 | Staff
Posted on Monday, May 07, 2012 10:45:57 AM by IbJensen
Despite what you may have heard from the mainstream media, Mitt Romney does not have the Republican nomination locked up. In fact, he is rapidly losing delegates that almost everyone assumed that he already had in the bag.
To understand why this is happening, you have to understand the delegate selection process. Each state has different rules for selecting delegates to the Republican national convention, and in many states the "voting" done by the public does not determine the allocation of delegates to particular candidates at all. And the truth is that delegates are the only thing that really matters in this race.
In state after state, the Ron Paul campaign is focusing on the delegate selection process with laser-like precision, and it is paying off big time. At this point, there is still a legitimate chance that Ron Paul will be able to win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot at the Republican national convention in Tampa. If Romney does not have the 1,144 delegates that he needs on the first ballot, then it becomes a brokered convention and anything becomes possible at that point.
Sadly, most Americans have no idea how this process really works.
For example, originally we were all told that Mitt Romney won Iowa.
Then, later on we were told that a mistake was made and that Rick Santorum actually won Iowa.
Well, it turns out that Ron Paul actually won 20 out of the 28 delegates in Iowa. That is because the process of actually selecting the delegates occurred long after the voting by the public was over.
So what happens if the Ron Paul campaign is able to produce similar results in state after state?
The Ron Paul campaign is very organized, very motivated and they understand the rules of the game. As a recent Politico article detailed, there are huge amounts of unbound delegates out there that are still up for grabs....
There are roughly 30 states and territories where delegates aren’t bound to a particular candidate. The majority of the other states, according to a number of party officials, call for delegates to be bound for a first round of balloting but not the ensuing rounds.
“The dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want,” said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. “Each state has different (laws) on pledged delegates.” In many states, the "official" results of voting done by the public mean next to nothing. The talking heads on television often tell us how many delegates are "projected" to go to a particular candidate, but as we have seen in Iowa and in so many other states, those "projections" are basically meaningless.
A recent Salon article discussed how the delegate selection process really works and how the Ron Paul campaign is using these rules to shake up the game....
In many caucus states, the “official” results that most people saw this winter were from nonbinding straw polls conducted in conjunction with precinct-level caucuses. But when it comes to choosing national convention delegates, the real action is at district caucuses and state conventions. In the past, this distinction hasn’t mattered much, but for the Paul forces – who lack the numbers to win statewide primaries but have the devotion to pack any room, anywhere, at any time – it has offered an inviting loophole. When turnout is small and no one is looking, the Paul folks can win, and that’s what’s been happening in a number of states.
To Paul die-hards, this will all culminate in a surprise for the ages in Tampa, with the political world suddenly realizing that Romney actually doesn’t have the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination, thereby allowing Paul to extract major concessions or even steal the nomination for himself. So could Ron Paul really deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination?
At this point, nobody really seems to know what the real delegate count is.
Websites such as The Real 2012 Delegate Count are more accurate than most sources in the mainstream media, but even that site has been underestimating the true number of Ron Paul delegates.
Right now, Mitt Romney is not anywhere close to having the number of delegates that he needs for the nomination and Ron Paul just keeps picking up more delegates with each passing week.
For example, a Washington Post article that was posted on Sunday reported that Ron Paul just achieved a stunning delegate victory in Nevada....
Despite former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s overwhelming victory in the Nevada caucuses, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has won a majority of the state’s delegates to the party’s national convention later this year in Tampa, Florida.
Thanks to organized Paul supporters, who have been working to increase their candidate’s support at state conventions around the country, 22 of the 25 Nevada delegates up for grabs will be Paul supporters. (Another three are automatic delegates.) That was a state that Romney supposedly "won".
It looks like Romney has a real problem.
In state after state, Ron Paul is gobbling up delegates. The following are quotes from a recent Huffington Post article about what the Ron Paul campaign has been able to achieve in the past few weeks....
-"Sure enough, Paul has already won 20 out of the 24 delegates allocated in Minnesota, by winning a majority of the congressional district contests."
-"In Louisiana, Paulites "dominated" the congressional district caucuses this past Saturday, according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune. Paul's supporters carried four of the state's congressional districts, and are guaranteed at least 17 of 46 delegates in the Bayou State, with the potential to pick up more at the state convention on June 2."
-"The other state that Benton likely has his eye on is Colorado, where the Denver Post reported in mid-April that Paul supporters and Santorum backers combined forces to win a "stunning upset" at the state convention, guaranteeing that about half of the state's 33 delegates will be for Paul in August."
And look what just happened in Maine according to USA Today....
In votes leading to the close of the two-day Maine convention, Paul supporters were elected to 21 of the 24 delegate spots from Maine to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla.
So Ron Paul is definitely accumulating a huge pile of his own delegates, but even many so-called "pledged delegates" for Romney could end up playing a huge role for Ron Paul.
In some states, Ron Paul supporters have been getting elected into delegate slots that are supposed to go to Romney. This is highly unusual, and it could really shake things up at the national convention. As a Salon article recently explained there will be quite a few Ron Paul supporters that will actually be going to Tampa "disguised" as Romney delegates....
Besides the pledged delegates he’s won so far and the extras he’s collecting through caucuses and state conventions, Paul will also have some supporters disguised as Romney delegates.
To understand how this works, just consider his campaign’s mischief in Massachusetts, where Romney won 72 percent of the primary vote – and with it, a monopoly on the state’s pledged convention delegates. But to determine who would fill those pledged delegate slots, the state GOP held caucuses recently, and the Paul crowd came out in force, gobbling up 16 of the 19 available positions. In how many other states will this happen, or has it already happened?
But those delegates are required to vote for Romney, right?
Not so fast.
The Ron Paul campaign could actually ask those "disguised" Romney delegates to abstain during the first round of voting in Tampa. If Romney did not win on the first ballot, those delegates would then become unbound and would be able to support Ron Paul.
In fact, Ronald Reagan considered using this tactic against Gerald Ford in 1976. The following is from a 1976 article entitled "Reagan Forces May ‘Steal’ Ford Votes"....
“In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts.
This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory. Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan.
Delegates have abstained from voting before. Back in 2008, at least 14 delegates abstained from voting at the Republican national convention.
So what would happen if the Ron Paul campaign was able to get 100 or 150 "Romney delegates" to abstain from voting during the first ballot in Tampa?
That is a very intriguing question.
And remember, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich also have significant numbers of delegates pledged to each of them.
So Ron Paul does not need to accumulate 1,144 delegates himself to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot. He just needs to keep Romney from getting to 1,144.
The race for the Republican nomination is not over.
You can find a state by state breakdown of delegate voting rules right here.
It is not too late to get involved.
If nobody gets to 1,144 on the first ballot in Tampa, it becomes a "brokered convention" and anyone can become the nominee - even someone that is not running right now.
So if you are not satisfied with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, don't lose hope yet.
The game is still being played.
It would be a challenge, but if his supporters get energized enough, it certainly is possible that Ron Paul could still win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination on the first ballot in Tampa.
And if that happens, anything is possible.
-
I don't remember "vehement" denials. What I remember telling you is the the person who gets to 1144 after winning the necessary number of states will be the nominee. And that's exactly what's going to happen.
You clearly said that the number of bound delegates coming out of these states would represent the popular vote in the non-binding straw polls. The OP of this thread is you admitting that you're a bumbling idiot and basically had no clue what you were talking about.
-
You clearly said that the number of bound delegates coming out of these states would represent the popular vote in the non-binding straw polls. The OP of this thread is you admitting that you're a bumbling idiot and basically had no clue what you were talking about.
Some people are incapable of independent critical thinking. If he hasn't unlocked his mind at this point there is no hope.
-
Ron Paul supporters capture majority of Nevada’s national delegates
Las Vegas Sun ^ | 05/06/2012 | By Anjeanette Damon
Posted on May 6, 2012 8:07:18 PM EDT by redreno
Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul captured the majority of Nevada’s national delegates early Sunday, overwhelming likely nominee Mitt Romney with an organized contingent who easily took control of the state convention.
Paul’s supporters won 22 of the 25 national delegate slots up for election at the state convention in Sparks on Saturday. Romney won three.
Another three automatic delegates are expected to support Romney, meaning Romney will have six supporters in the delegation and Paul will have 22.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
Meh. Doesn't matter. Assuming they actually get seated, they'll be voting for Romney on the first ballot at the convention or they will get removed.
-
True, it would be very undemocratic.
I'm at a crossroads though of thinking that him getting in, even if sneaky, may be the best thing. But, maybe I'm just being a self-righteous douchebag. If it's the people's will to keep him out...so be it.
Yeah. This whole process is supposed to be about letting the voters decide. And after 42 state contests, they've decided they don't want Ron Paul. It's really ironic that some of his supporters mention "liberty" so much while at the same time try to disenfranchise millions of voters.
-
You clearly said that the number of bound delegates coming out of these states would represent the popular vote in the non-binding straw polls. The OP of this thread is you admitting that you're a bumbling idiot and basically had no clue what you were talking about.
What I clearly said is the candidate with the required number of delegates will be the nominee. Just like Nevada. Romney won the popular vote in Nevada. The "Ron Paul" delegates will either vote for Romney or get removed. That is what will happen for every state Romney won. There isn't going to be a brokered convention. ::)
I actually talked to a Hawaii delegate today who will be attending the convention. I asked him about the Nevada and Maine results and he rolled his eyes. Pretty funny. :) His word: "futile." He also said he thinks the Ron Paul supporters are "crazy." No prompting from me. :)
But it's good that you kids are getting so involved in the process. Keep up the good fight. Stay involved.
-
Yeah. This whole process is supposed to be about letting the voters decide. And after 42 state contests, they've decided they don't want Ron Paul. It's really ironic that some of his supporters mention "liberty" so much while at the same time try to disenfranchise millions of voters.
I'm getting sick of your ignorance.
-
I'm getting sick of your ignorance.
There is a really complicated way to deal with it: don't read what I post or engage me. :)
It is Paulbots like you who help prevent Ron Paul from being taken seriously.
-
MAY 6, 2012, 8:39 PM
Still in the Race, and Plotting a Path to the Convention
By MICHAEL D. SHEAR
The marquee names in the cast of the 2012 presidential election are Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. But in the days ahead, watch out for a somewhat forgotten member of the extras: Ron Paul.
Ben Margot/Associated PressRon Paul in April.
Mr. Paul, below, a Texas congressman, officially remains in the hunt for the Republican nomination. And now, his well-organized network of faithful supporters is causing trouble for Mr. Romney at state party conventions around the country.
In state after state, Mr. Paul’s libertarian-minded army of volunteers is trying to seize delegates from Mr. Romney, taking over party chairmanships and ousting longstanding party officials with ties to Mr. Romney.
Nothing Mr. Paul is doing threatens Mr. Romney’s hold on the nomination. But the actions could have an impact at the Republican National Convention on these fronts:
THE DELEGATES In essence, Mr. Paul is doing what Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich had threatened to do — use gatherings of conservative voters at state party conventions to peel away delegates that were awarded to Mr. Romney during the primaries and caucuses.
He is having some success.
In Nevada on Saturday, Bob List, a former governor and a Romney supporter, lost his seat on the Republican National Committee (and his ticket to the convention) to a backer of Mr. Paul, according to The Las Vegas Review-Journal.
A headline from The Portland Press Herald in Maine tells the story there: “Ron Paul Supporters Take Over Maine G.O.P. Convention.” Supporters of Mr. Paul were elected chairman and secretary of the state convention.
In Iowa, Mr. Paul’s supporters dominated the selection of at-large delegates, according to The Iowa Republican. And in Alaska, his supporters grabbed the convention chairmanship as well, says The Alaska Dispatch.
THE TALLY Thanks to Mr. Paul’s supporters, he will arrive in Tampa, Fla., for the Republican convention this summer with more delegates than many media tallies would suggest.
That will not give him a real shot at the nomination, but it might give him the ability to make a ruckus while he is there. The more delegates he has, the better chance he might have to prevent Mr. Romney from being nominated on the first ballot.
Even if that does not happen, Mr. Paul could use a larger number of delegates as leverage for a better speaking slot at the convention. Or he could negotiate with Mr. Romney’s people for a bigger role for his son, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky.
THE PLATFORM But Mr. Paul’s main goal is most likely to put himself at the center of shaping the party’s official platform at the convention.
The platform lays out where the party stands on social, economic and military issues, and it is written by a committee that typically operates at the direction of the nominee — in this case, Mr. Romney.
But delegates for Mr. Paul could try to upset that arrangement by pushing hard to be included in the platform debates. Mr. Paul’s views on the Federal Reserve, Iraq and Afghanistan, drug policy, health care and the deficit are very different from Mr. Romney’s.
In the end, Mr. Romney’s allies are likely to win those debates. Modern political conventions have become largely ceremonial affairs, and Mr. Paul probably will not change that, even with the extra delegates he is amassing.
THE YOUTH VOTE There is one other danger for Mr. Romney as his political team tries to deal with Mr. Paul.
Many of Mr. Paul’s supporters across the country are young voters Mr. Romney will need in November as he competes with President Obama. In some places, the youth vote — if it turns out — could be decisive.
As a result, Mr. Romney cannot afford to treat Mr. Paul in a dismissive way that could turn off his supporters. That might give Mr. Paul even more leverage at the convention as he seeks to advance his movement and his issues.
-
That will not give him a real shot at the nomination, but it might give him the ability to make a ruckus while he is there. The more delegates he has, the better chance he might have to prevent Mr. Romney from being nominated on the first ballot.
Correct. They're just going to alienate a lot of people, then probably disappear when Romney is nominated.
-
BB,
If you had to choose to win against Obama with Ron Paul, or lose against obama with Mitt ROmney...
Which would you choose?
You don't have to answer, of course.
-
msnbc attacking ron paul for his delegates stategy. but chuck todd admitted RP's crowds are much bigger than Romney's.
In Maine - 21 of the 24 delegates in Maine (a state mitt won) are supporting Ron paul.
Nevada - Romney won - but RP SUpporters just won 22 of the 25 delegates. They CANNOT vote for ron paul - but they can skip voting. So Romney would get 3 delegates there and fall 22 short there.
Mass - Romney won 70% of vote. But 16 of 38 delegate seats belong on Ron Paul.
WOW - Paul delegates who are required to vote Mitt actually CAN not vote at all.
SUPPOSE Ron Paul delegates have 30 to 40% of the delegates... something that is loooking like a possibility - Does Mitt put him on the ticket? Or just limp out of the convention looking rather impotent and limp d*cked?
-
msnbc attacking ron paul for his delegates stategy. but chuck todd admitted RP's crowds are much bigger than Romney's.
In Maine - 21 of the 24 delegates in Maine (a state mitt won) are supporting Ron paul.
Nevada - Romney won - but RP SUpporters just won 22 of the 25 delegates. They CANNOT vote for ron paul - but they can skip voting. So Romney would get 3 delegates there and fall 22 short there.
Mass - Romney won 70% of vote. But 16 of 38 delegate seats belong on Ron Paul.
WOW - Paul delegates who are required to vote Mitt actually CAN not vote at all.
SUPPOSE Ron Paul delegates have 30 to 40% of the delegates... something that is loooking like a possibility - Does Mitt put him on the ticket? Or just limp out of the convention looking rather impotent and limp d*cked?
If romney put RP as Veep or gave him a spot as Treas Sec. Romney would do himself a ton of good.
-
If romney put RP as Veep or gave him a spot as Treas Sec. Romney would do himself a ton of good.
I'l say it right now. Mitt adds Ron Paul and he wins this race running away.
Mitt and Ron Paul would have to work things out, maybe paint it as a union of moderate and far-right conservatism.
It'd be unbeatable. I know getbiggers deny it, but a lot of ron paul supporters (anti-war, anti-bush repubs) did vote obama last time.
-
I'l say it right now. Mitt adds Ron Paul and he wins this race running away.
Mitt and Ron Paul would have to work things out, maybe paint it as a union of moderate and far-right conservatism.
It'd be unbeatable. I know getbiggers deny it, but a lot of ron paul supporters (anti-war, anti-bush repubs) did vote obama last time.
ron Paul would get Mittens the additional 3%-5% planning on sitting it out and that would be enough to push him over the top easily.
Mittens would also get the Ron Paul army hopefully to mobilize online and on college campuses to take on the marxists and communists backing that treasonous piece of garbage in office now.
-
ron Paul would get Mittens the additional 3%-5% planning on sitting it out and that would be enough to push him over the top easily.
Mittens would also get the Ron Paul army hopefully to mobilize online and on college campuses to take on the marxists and communists backing that treasonous piece of garbage in office now.
obama had the youth vote in 08 - but ron paul had it first.
in 2012, if ron paul relinquishes it like he did last time, obama WILL pick up most of the young people again. dems usually get the youth vote.
But if romney put ron paul on the ticket (and they were noticabley nice to each other during the campaign, remember?)...
ROmney would have that whole army on his side getting him elected.
-
The trash at the Repub establishment set the rules for the primary which favored mittens and if Paul can use those rules to get in or get what he wants so be it.
+1000
-
True, it would be very undemocratic.
I'm at a crossroads though of thinking that him getting in, even if sneaky, may be the best thing. But, maybe I'm just being a self-righteous douchebag. If it's the people's will to keep him out...so be it.
The peoples will?
Are you fucking kidding ???
If FOX had supported RP as they should he would have won big time
-
Yeah. This whole process is supposed to be about letting the voters decide. And after 42 state contests, they've decided they don't want Ron Paul. It's really ironic that some of his supporters mention "liberty" so much while at the same time try to disenfranchise millions of voters.
::) ::) ::)
-
Because there is no such thing as voter fraud in this country. ::)
-
Because there is no such thing as voter fraud in this country. ::)
You dont need voter fraud when you have the media + stupid people
-
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/elections
Ron Paul tied with Baby Doc Barack
-
BB,
If you had to choose to win against Obama with Ron Paul, or lose against obama with Mitt ROmney...
Which would you choose?
You don't have to answer, of course.
As I've stated numerous time, I'm voting for ABO, and Ron Paul will never be the nominee. If it snowed in Honolulu and Ron Paul became the nominee, of course I'd vote for him over Obama.
If you had to choose between Thune, Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, or Paul to support as the Republican nominee for president, which would you choose?
You don't have to answer, of course.
-
The peoples will?
Are you fucking kidding ???
If FOX had supported RP as they should he would have won big time
Fox News' failure to support Ron Paul is the reason he didn't win the nomination "big time"? Seriously? lol
Ok. What exactly should Fox News have done, other than put in on the air repeatedly, despite his poll numbers and poor primary/caucus performance?
-
Fox News' failure to support Ron Paul is the reason he didn't win the nomination "big time"? Seriously? lol
Ok. What exactly should Fox News have done, other than put in on the air repeatedly, despite his poll numbers and poor primary/caucus performance?
Many of the FOX personalities went out of their way to shit on ron paul during the primaries.
I'm not sure of any evidence the network itself worked AGAINST ron paul.
-
Fox News' failure to support Ron Paul is the reason he didn't win the nomination "big time"? Seriously? lol
Ok. What exactly should Fox News have done, other than put in on the air repeatedly, despite his poll numbers and poor primary/caucus performance?
How about giving him a fair treatment?
Since they label themselves as conservatives its pretty fucking amazing they wont support the ONLY conservative candidate
-
Many of the FOX personalities went out of their way to shit on ron paul during the primaries.
I'm not sure of any evidence the network itself worked AGAINST ron paul.
Who do you think writes their scripts?
Judge Nep was fired because of his critical views remember...
-
Ron Paul might highjack the convention but he won't be doing it with a water gun because those aren't allowed.
-
Ron Paul might highjack the convention but he won't be doing it with a water gun because those aren't allowed.
Lol.
-
How about giving him a fair treatment?
Since they label themselves as conservatives its pretty fucking amazing they wont support the ONLY conservative candidate
I think they've been more than fair. He got way more coverage than his performance warranted. He was all over the network. Which other candidate who performed so poorly got as much as coverage as Ron Paul?
They don't label themselves as conservative. Where are you getting that from?
-
Lol.
Some good ones in there.
BAM.
lol
-
The peoples will?
Are you fucking kidding ???
If FOX had supported RP as they should he would have won big time
Yeah...FoxNews is at fault. ::)
-
Yeah...FoxNews is at fault. ::)
Yup they certainly are