Ron Paul campaign Press Release: Ron Paul WINNING the Battle for Delegates.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Sorry but your dislike (borderline hatred?) for Ron Paul blinds you to the rampant manipulation,

Is this what you and other supporters are going to do everytime somebody doesn't agree with your analysis on his performances? Generalize or mark all people as merely haters? I don't like Paul but my own analysis has little to do with my position on his policies. His perforamnces are self evident thus far.

You just literally took a proven example of blatant fraud

What 'blatant fraud'? I said an investigation is still going on. You're automatically assuming that this was some conspiracy against Paul and you want me to readily believe you.

If you guys are so ignorant to the fact that the GOP actually abides by their own by-laws, you've got some re-evaluation to do. I personally know central committee members in the GOP...the things these people do (or sometimes don't do) is nothing short of FRAUDULENT and CORRUPT

Well this is your personal opinion, and I believe you to be strongly emotionally invested in Paul's campaign, as with many of his supporters. You have to continue explaining away his weak performances in the GOP primaries for your own sake and for the sake of his campaign. I just don't believe this will get him to address the real problems facing his campaign i.e his inability to connect with a wide array of GOP voters, his inability to win states.

Ron Paul is sitting 4th on the table... even though Gingrich wasn't even focused on those western states, he still managed to stay third due to his win in South Carolina. Paul is last on the GOP list, and he has not won a state yet. It's not looking good.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

If you've been watching a person play a board game for decades and that person knows all the rules and has been inviting new players but not telling them the rules or how to win why would you condemn the act of the new players learning the rules to beat him?

What you are suggesting Ron Paul to do is to win the nomination without winning the popular vote.

I'm not sure...but you would cry fraud if that happened with any other candidate.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

Sorry but your dislike (borderline hatred?) for Ron Paul blinds you to the rampant manipulation,

Is this what you and other supporters are going to do everytime somebody doesn't agree with your analysis on his performances? Generalize or mark all people as merely haters? I don't like Paul but my own analysis has little to do with my position on his policies. His perforamnces are self evident thus far.

You just literally took a proven example of blatant fraud

What 'blatant fraud'? I said an investigation is still going on. You're automatically assuming that this was some conspiracy against Paul and you want me to readily believe you.

If you guys are so ignorant to the fact that the GOP actually abides by their own by-laws, you've got some re-evaluation to do. I personally know central committee members in the GOP...the things these people do (or sometimes don't do) is nothing short of FRAUDULENT and CORRUPT

Well this is your personal opinion, and I believe you to be strongly emotionally invested in Paul's campaign, as with many of his supporters. You have to continue explaining away his weak performances in the GOP primaries for your own sake and for the sake of his campaign. I just don't believe this will get him to address the real problems facing his campaign i.e his inability to connect with a wide array of GOP voters, his inability to win states.

Ron Paul is sitting 4th on the table... even though Gingrich wasn't even focused on those western states, he still managed to stay third due to his win in South Carolina. Paul is last on the GOP list, and he has not won a state yet. It's not looking good.

edit on 8-2-2012 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)

You're forgetting that win or lose I'm with Ron Paul all the way. I'm not going to jump ship to save my own ass, I'm working to win this election (no I'm not wasting my time) and I'm looking at the big picture as well. Of course I'd prefer WINS but we're still early in the game, Ron has a strong chance to take Maine and Washington with many open caucuses states coming up.

Yea, poor performance despite media manipulation and GOP shakedowns, I'd say we're doing great. They had to fake Santorum's numbers to surge him in Iowa, you really think he got 1st on his own?

My personal opinion on GOP fraud and corruption at every level? Join the GOP central committees and SEE for yourself. The Nevada state convention of 08 had many testimonials, you can choose to believe that the GOP is pure and innocent all you want but deep down you know what they are capable of.

Like I said before and I stick to it, your dislike of Ron Paul blinds you to blatant manipulation by the media and the establishment. If you don't want to accept it, thats your deal.

I don't have to explain away weak performances, I see them for what they are and I continue to strive for victory. I'm on the right side of history, this revolution does not stop at 2012, freedom is popular.

Ron Paul's support has grown by leaps and bounds since 2008, the more states he comes to the more support he racks up and he does this without the media. He has genuine supporters that believe strongly in the message of freedom, honesty and following the Constitution. None of the other candidates can say the same, not even Obama and his mindless drones.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher



What are you talking about?


Answer the question.


You already know you are wrong on this, condemning Ron Paul and his supporters for learning the rules and beating the GOP at their own game.

So what if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination by delegates? Maybe the GOP won't let him have it, maybe they will...who knows? So what if he didn't get the majority popular vote? If he is the GOP nominee, the party will vote for him. The point is to beat OBAMA.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

At this point, I am actually hoping that Ron Paul is gaming the delegate system.

Why you ask??? Well nothing will disenfranchise GOP voters more than having a candidate get nominated by gaming the process. When the majority of people have not voted for him, but he games the delegate selection to get the nomination...people will hold that against him.

I know Ron Paul supporters think they don't need the GOP base to win the general election...but I think they are sadly mistaken. Ron Paul supporters think they will draw a huge crossover from the Democrats...but the polls and the primaries/caucuses so far have not shown that.

So you go Ron Paul...game the system...and fracture the GOP more than it already is. I fully support this strategy by Ron Paul.

How does knowing the rules and following them become "gaming" the system? The Ron Paul camps strategy has never been a secret. Ron Paul himself has said multiple times that they would continue to pick up as many delegates as they could for the convention. So who's fault is it that supporters of the other candidates didn't pick up a book, use Google, or make phone calls so they would be as informed of the full extent of the process as Ron Paul's campaign and supporters? They should know that showing up and voting is only a portion of the process during these primaries/caucuses.

As far as the GOP base, where would they go? If Ron Paul's delegate strategy works and he becomes the nominee I see them voting Ron Paul in the general election. The GOP base has a mentality of anybody but Obama. They will not vote Obama and I don't see them risking an Obama 2nd term by not voting. So Ron Paul supporters don't believe they don't need the GOP base, they are pretty sure they will have them.

And before I am labeled as a Paulbot or any number of the other names associated with Ron Paul let it be known that I am an undecided independent voter watching all sides carefully.

reply to post by FraggleRock


They're just mad the Ron Paul campaign has a strategy to win the GOP nomination and is following through with that strategy successfully in an organized manner.

Ron Paul has the highest chance of beating Obama and that is why the Obama supporters will come out and bash all day at every millimeter that Ron Paul gains in this election.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by FraggleRock

 

They're just mad the Ron Paul campaign has a strategy to win the GOP nomination and is following through with that strategy successfully in an organized manner.

Ron Paul has the highest chance of beating Obama and that is why the Obama supporters will come out and bash all day at every millimeter that Ron Paul gains in this election.

Highest chance? You should be a stand-up comedian. He hasn't won a single primary yet. Laughable.

Originally posted by eLPresidente
You're forgetting that win or lose I'm with Ron Paul all the way.

I understand this. It doesn't excuse yours or Paul's campaign's analysis of his performances. When somebody says that Paul is 'winning' in anything, with his results looking like the way they are at the moment, I have to question how on earth they came to that conclusion.

has a strong chance to take Maine and Washington with many open caucuses states coming up.

Quiet right there we still have a number of States to go, but given Paul's outcome in the last primaries, it's becoming increasingly harder for him to gain any kind of momentum and to compete. John King from CNN gave a Paul a good chance in Washington and Maine so who knows, we'll have to see. If his performances end up being typical, then I'm not sure how he will be able to continue arguing his electability with the voters. Electability goes beyond one's personal ideological views.

Yea, poor performance despite media manipulation

Look, the media consists of private businesses. They will focus on candidates who are leading the pack, candidates who are getting the votes in, Paul's dismal performances and his position in the race now does not understably get him the same media attention as Romney, this is just the reality.

The Nevada state convention of 08 had many testimonials,

I'll check this out on google.

your dislike of Ron Paul blinds you to blatant manipulation by the media and the establishment

.....and the beat keeps running. This isn't helping Paul's campaign at all.

Originally posted by FraggleRock
As far as the GOP base, where would they go? If Ron Paul's delegate strategy works and he becomes the nominee I see them voting Ron Paul in the general election. The GOP base has a mentality of anybody but Obama.

This is where I agree with you. Anybody but Obama, GOP voters will flock behind Paul in the scenario that Paul win's the GOP nomination, and they are prepared to sacrifice their warhawkish appetities. As to whether Paulers will do the same if Ron Paul loses? Well I'm not sure, I'm leaning to believing that most will end up voting for Romney or Gingrich or Santorum... they just won't mention it to their fellow Paul supporters.

And before I am labeled as a Paulbot or any number of the other names associated with Ron Paul let it be known that I am an undecided independent voter

Explain to us why you have not thrown your support around Paul yet? Given that you're undecided.

Read all the Straw Polls and press releases you want. The actual delegate count, today, is:

Romney 87
Santorum 35
Gingrich 32
Paul 13

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Explain to us why you have not thrown your support around Paul yet? Given that you're undecided.

Fear and complacency to be honest or maybe it's more of a lack of understanding revolving around his domestic policy. The idea of throwing everyone to the wolves and only the strong survives scares me. I know that's a rather harsh way of describing his domestic policy but that's kind of how I see it happening.

that statment reeks of desperation

sad

reply to post by schuyler


lol...that is false.

Delegate counts have not been awarded yet for several of the states, we will find out soon just how many delegates Ron Paul has organized. Many reports coming in from Colorado and Minnesota of RP taking majority or all of the delegates.

Many caucus states to come.

www.kunc.org...

In honor of Tuesday's delegate-free caucuses and primary, NPR is launching a 2012 Delegate Tracker.

The NPR Elections Unit tracker credits a candidate with delegates only when party rule or state law unambiguously awards those delegates to that candidate. New Hampshire and Nevada, for example, have clear rules for how delegates are to be awarded according to the proportion of the votes received on election day. Iowa, Minnesota and Colorado, in contrast, require several additional steps before awarding any delegates at all. Delegates will actually be awarded weeks and months after the elections.

Florida and Arizona present a separate issue: The two states violate both the GOP's calendar rule not permitting contests before March 6 (except for the four "carve-out" states: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada), as well as a separate rule prohibiting winner-take-all formats prior to April 1. Both states were penalized by the Republican National Committee for the calendar violation with a loss of 50 percent of their delegates. Both also face challenges to their winner-take-all schemes at the August convention in Tampa.

The NPR tracker also ignores the votes of RNC members not bound by the results of the elections. These votes by definition can be switched from one candidate to another at the sole discretion of the RNC member.

For now, despite his rough night, the NPR tracker shows Mitt Romney leading with 73 delegates; Newt Gingrich in second with 29; Ron Paul in third place with 8; and Tuesday's big winner, Rick Santorum, in last place with 3 delegates. All have a long way to go to get to 1,144, the number needed to secure the GOP nomination.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible for a candidate to win the general election WITHOUT a majority of the popular vote? Electoral votes are what counts

If so, why would it be a problem for a candidate to win the nomination of their party without the majority of the popular vote? Delegates are what count.

Originally posted by Cynicaleye

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by FraggleRock

 

They're just mad the Ron Paul campaign has a strategy to win the GOP nomination and is following through with that strategy successfully in an organized manner.

Ron Paul has the highest chance of beating Obama and that is why the Obama supporters will come out and bash all day at every millimeter that Ron Paul gains in this election.

Highest chance? You should be a stand-up comedian. He hasn't won a single primary yet. Laughable.

Obviously the primaries come off as a Beauty pageant....where initial questions such as "Papa Johns, Dominos, or Pizza Hut?" reigned supreme. The man (paul) is no beauty king, but has brains, so in a discussion of Paul vs Obama, Paul has yrs, Experience and knowledge, he'd smash BOH. would you personally debate RP on any policy?

my only honest concern, is will RP get the chance to have such a debate. It seems that either EVERYONE is asleep....or I still am.

Originally posted by fusion47
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible for a candidate to win the general election WITHOUT a majority of the popular vote? Electoral votes are what counts

If so, why would it be a problem for a candidate to win the nomination of their party without the majority of the popular vote? Delegates are what count.

It is possible in the Presidential election and has happened a couple of times. The main difference being those are very close races between two people. In this case it would be a candidate that the voters in the GOP had soundly rejected. It could happen but, who would want a candidate that could not even win is his own party? Or take second or even third. The Dems would have a field day with it and the GOP would stay home in the general election. I kind of wish it would happen. It would be complete circus.

You have to understand that primaries and caucuses are not elections as they are portrayed. The rules of the election are set by the party, how the votes are cast can be arranged by the party, and the votes of the electorate may or may not have an impact.

While a candidate may "win" or "lose" a state, what really matters is how delegates vote at the convention. So, let's say that Rick Santorum won Minnesota, but all the delegates who actually go to the convention support Ron Paul. If Minnesota doesn't force the delegates to vote for the winner of their straw poll, these delegates may vote for whomever they choose.

Understanding this process, many of the Ron Paul people are volunteering for party positions and to go to state caucus meetings and be delegates in primary states so they can have this power. In many states, the ballots being cast are just beauty contests, and have no weight on how delegates vote. In some states, delegates may be bound for a first vote at the convention, but not for a second or a third. And even then, I think a bound delegate could possibly vote against the binding, though it might be a criminal offense eventually, depending on the laws of a given state.

At the Federal level, it has happened before that electors (the slate chosen by each state to represent them at the electoral college) have voted differently than they have pledged.

But anyway, when the media tells you candidate X won X delegates and candidate Y won Y, that's usually assuming the apportionment of delegates at the convention is equal to their corresponding share of the popular vote. This almost never happens. Historically, few races have been decided late, and all the delegates just go to the frontrunner as a sign of unity unless the convention is divided. If it is, however, the people on the floor who represent the party will make the decisions.

For the record, this process happens in both the Democratic and Republican parties, but if this e-mail is to be believed, my experience as a campaign manager, former committeeperson, and general wonk is that you absolutely could do this, could game an election, and could win the nomination despite only having a small % of the vote.

Party rules are designed to protect the parties, and the facade that these are the preliminary democratic elections is just that: a sham. It was put in place to make people feel involved in the process to give money and increase candidate identification, but the power brokers always kept a hand on the tiller (by granting themselves superdelegates, for instance), though there hasn't ever been a nationwide full gaming of the system before.

It should be interesting to watch.

Arent these statements COMING from him and HIS camp? One-sided Im sure. What are they supposed to say? Read Romneys or Gingrich's. Same thing. Jaded and "for" their candidates.

The end result? None of it can be taken against the whole of all of them together claiming "victory". We'll have to wait and see how it all plays out.

The Ron Paul hatred is relentless now days. Maybe we should start making more Obama threads even though we dislike him, so we can give these people a taste of their own medicine.

Thank you Outkast Searcher and Southern Guardian, Keep bumping Ron Paul threads so they stay at the top of the topics list.

The work you do for the Ron Paul grassroots campaign are invaluable.

Keep it up! Ron Paul 2012!