GOP delegates sue to be free from Romney-123 & Counting (Ron Paul still alive!!)

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by anon72
Go RON PAUL... Make the system work-if anything.

I say let Ron Paul have his 120 delegates, it won't change the situation. Romney got more than 4 million votes over Ron Paul, he recieved the majority of votes in the entire GOP race, the nomination is rightfully his. If anything Paul supporters are demonstrating the very thing they insist they hate, they wish to turn as many delegates against the wishes of their constituents.

As OutKast says, this is probably not the way Paul wants things to go, he'll have to do something, possibly endorse Romney, in order to simmer things down for the few of his supporters.

lol you are just full of it.

Ron Paul will have to endorse Romney to simmer down his supporters? And you guys call Ron Paul supporters delusional for wanting to restore the Constitution and limited government. OK.

It is so funny how desperate the trolls are even when they've said Ron Paul has conceded and the movement is "over", they continue to make up B.S. to rile up the supporters. I love it.

Yes yes, Mitt Romney received 4 million votes and none of it had to do with the election fraud that started from day ONE in Iowa.

Now go fall in line with the establishment, they're waiting for you to bend over so they can screw you for another 4 years.





By the way, the federal judge assigned to this decision is a former USMC, fought in Vietnam (purple heart) and a known strict Constitutionalist. I can't wait to see U.S. Marshalls at the RNC enforcing rule of law over your preferred party corruption.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by anon72

 

Ron Paul's supporters are going to force him to drop our or concede to Romney.

He doesn't want the nomination like this...he doesn't want it by duping the American people...he has already said he is out of it...his son has already endorsed Romney.

I feel sorry for him because his supporters are putting him in a very difficult situation...but at the same time...he created this monster, so now he has to deal with the consequences.

After all of your Ron Paul trolling, all of a sudden you CARE about what Ron Paul WANTS?

Oh I see what you did there...sneaky sneaky...

WHAT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS THEY REPRESENT !!!!!!!!!!!!


this is treason

or is it ok if votes are meaningless ?

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
WHAT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS THEY REPRESENT !!!!!!!!!!!!

this is treason

or is it ok if votes are meaningless ?

Seems to me the RNC already considers the votes meaningless if they conflict with the old-party agenda. What is going on here should restore that "will of the voters" you speak of that goes largely unheeded and side-stepped.

The old authoritarian and dictatorial powers don't want to step aside for the new generations that now outnumber them. You should recognize this is what has been happening but maybe you have old-fashioned authoritarian views you cling to? Time has run out on that.

You guys are precious. Some really funny stuff coming from the anti-Paul trendies.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Good one. and I concur... but hey. Everyone can have a heart.

I am pretty sure the Paul folks would love to disrupt things but that will only aide Obama so... what do you do?

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
WHAT ABOUT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS THEY REPRESENT !!!!!!!!!!!!

this is treason

or is it ok if votes are meaningless ?

Seems to me the RNC already considers the votes meaningless if they conflict with the old-party agenda. What is going on here should restore that "will of the voters" you speak of that goes largely unheeded and side-stepped.

The old authoritarian and dictatorial powers don't want to step aside for the new generations that now outnumber them. You should recognize this is what has been happening but maybe you have old-fashioned authoritarian views you cling to? Time has run out on that.

You guys are precious. Some really funny stuff coming from the anti-Paul trendies.

edit on 17-6-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)

So electing the guy that got 10% of the votes and dismissing the guy that won the majority of the votes is restoring the will of the people?

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

So electing the guy that got 10% of the votes and dismissing the guy that won the majority of the votes is restoring the will of the people?

What the truth is remains unknown for certain. There are allegations of vote switching where the 70% awarded Romney were actually Paul's votes. These closed-door private vote counts make that quite possible to manipulate. We have seen when portions of votes were counted publicly the results belonged overwhelmingly to Paul. In some instances shenanigans seem to be proven. Overall, though, it is claimed that the GOP is a private organization and these pre-election activities for selecting their nominee are therefore not required the scrutiny of our general elections.

Ultimately, the party is not bound to play by a rigid set of rules. At local and state levels we see the delegate selection process and internal voting for regional officials happening haphazardly with results accepted or discarded capriciously. It might appear everyone may find gripe with some part of the process. That it is a private organization then legally it is what it is. Whatever decision made in the end is whatever they decide it is. If nothing else this election cycle helps further reveal the arbitrary nature of it all.

Ultimately it will be up to the delegates to decide at the convention who will be their nominee. A direct vote by and for the will of the people is not part of their rules, we get who we get. Relax, you anti-Pauls will still likely get your Romney-boy.

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

So electing the guy that got 10% of the votes and dismissing the guy that won the majority of the votes is restoring the will of the people?

What the truth is remains unknown for certain. There are allegations of vote switching where the 70% awarded Romney were actually Paul's votes. These closed-door private vote counts make that quite possible to manipulate. We have seen when portions of votes were counted publicly the results belonged overwhelmingly to Paul. In some instances shenanigans seem to be proven. Overall, though, it is claimed that the GOP is a private organization and these pre-election activities for selecting their nominee are therefore not required the scrutiny of our general elections.

Ultimately, the party is not bound to play by a rigid set of rules. At local and state levels we see the delegate selection process and internal voting for regional officials happening haphazardly with results accepted or discarded capriciously. It might appear everyone may find gripe with some part of the process. That it is a private organization then legally it is what it is. Whatever decision made in the end is whatever they decide it is. If nothing else this election cycle helps further reveal the arbitrary nature of it all.

Ultimately it will be up to the delegates to decide at the convention who will be their nominee. A direct vote by and for the will of the people is not part of their rules, we get who we get. Relax, you anti-Pauls will still likely get your Romney-boy.

edit on 19-6-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)

Link me to something saying Paul got the overwhelming majority of votes in public counts please.

Here is a better link.
Nice video .

www.mediaite.com...

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Here is a better link.
Nice video .

www.mediaite.com...

So a better link is where Ron Paul states he will sell out and endorse Romney if given a prime speakin slot and says he has reconciled himself to the fact Romney is the nominee? Interesting choice.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

So electing the guy that got 10% of the votes and dismissing the guy that won the majority of the votes is restoring the will of the people?

What the truth is remains unknown for certain. There are allegations of vote switching where the 70% awarded Romney were actually Paul's votes. These closed-door private vote counts make that quite possible to manipulate. We have seen when portions of votes were counted publicly the results belonged overwhelmingly to Paul. In some instances shenanigans seem to be proven.

Link me to something saying Paul got the overwhelming majority of votes in public counts please.

A link with a relevant excerpt.

worldundercontrol.com...

12:55am EST: The official Nevada Caucus vote count was still stuck where it had been for the last 4 hours. 47 percent of the vote counted and included every county but one. 53 percent of the vote still outstanding, all from Clark County – the largest county in Nevada representing more than 60 percent of the state’s voters. It’s also the scene of the Caucus site just broadcast showing Ron Paul winning overwhelming.

1:00am EST: The same precinct captain in Clark County calling out votes 30 minutes earlier was now about to announce the final vote totals from the nationally televised caucus site. With CNN showing it live, the rough final vote count (going from memory) was 150 for Ron Paul, 50 for Mitt Romney, 20 for Newt Gingrich and 8 for Rick Santorum.

1:05am EST: The same above precinct then announced they were going to recount each and every vote to insure an accurate vote count.

1:30am EST: CNN and the precinct captain revealed the results of the second count. This time Ron Paul’s count was roughly 183 (58 percent of the precinct’s overall vote) to Mitt Romney’s 45, Newt Gingrich’s 20 and Rick Santorum’s 8. (Again, all numbers from your author’s tired, late-night memory. If the media wasn’t blacking out the coverage now, we could share the actual numbers with our readers). Paul supporters are extatic knowing that they won overwhelmingly in a precinct full of Jewish and extremely Christian voters, two of Ron Paul’s worst demographics. In fact, CNN entrance polls showed that Ron Paul won overwhelmingly among voters who said they weren’t religious.

2:00am EST: Getting the sneaky suspicion that the Republican Party’s vote totals weren’t adding up again, a quick stop at the Ron Paul 2012 Facebook page revealed your author wasn’t alone. The campaign had posted a message saying that the Nevada GOP had announced that even though the first 47 percent of the votes were counted and reported in an hour, the remaining 53 percent, all coming from Clark County, would take all night. Random posts followed leveling accusations of suspicion and even outright vote fraud. Many had watched the results being tabulated live on national TV just as this author had. We all saw Ron Paul’s overwhelming victory in that part of Clark County. It’s unimaginable to believe that in the same county, a candidate could win overwhelmingly when the votes were counted live on TV, but lose so badly when the votes were counted by the Party establishment behind closed doors.

I recall another instance involving a small Maine precinct that saw a discrepancy with their own manual ballot count and the official published count. Sorry, over these months I'm losing some of the particulars about these instances. This is offered not as proof but as being relevant to the discussion.

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


So we are talking about small precincts, which are meaningless when talking about the majority of Americans. I'm looking for something substantive, not a precinct with 200 total votes.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


You are only looking for that because it is an extra hoop you are trying to make someone jump through to give you evidence that you will dismiss anyway.

Most precincts are small. Those 200 would be just as much a cross section as any place else. Not like it's a precinct of a libertarian gated community or anything.

The argument you tried to make in your post is just a waste of time and space.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

You are only looking for that because it is an extra hoop you are trying to make someone jump through to give you evidence that you will dismiss anyway.

Most precincts are small. Those 200 would be just as much a cross section as any place else. Not like it's a precinct of a libertarian gated community or anything.

The argument you tried to make in your post is just a waste of time and space.

So you can take any precinct of 200 people and that is as much a cross section as anywhere else? Are you serious? You clearly have no background in statistics. I am asking someone to prove a claim they made, if you dont want to prove something dont claim it to be true.


Hand counted over 17,000 ballots in 100 precincts, Romney got over 50% of the votes, Ron Paul 18.7%. Every nominee had someone there to ensure no fraud. Someone needs to tell them somewhere 200 people liked Dr. Paul, so this cant be true.

"We counted every ballot in Clark County," said Gibbs, who managed the vote verification Saturday and Sunday. "No one can say we didn't scrutinize and verify every vote."

Asked if there was any evidence of fraud or ballot-box stuffing, Gallagher said, "Not that I'm aware of."

Seems like facts are on my side, again.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

I am asking someone to prove a claim they made, if you dont want to prove something dont claim it to be true.

I stated allegations have been made and it seems I have shown that, whether or not you find these allegations to your personal satisfaction. You want more proof or bigger precincts you are certainly free to seek those out. This is a matter pending court decision and they will ultimately decide whether or not these allegations hold merit.

I see your own referenced statements lack links to sources. Are you genuinely attempting to present an argument, or are you just arguing? In either event it would be helpful if you would zero-in on what it is you are attempting to claim. Is the point you are trying to make is that these grievances should not be challenged in court? I get that you disagree with the challenges, but again, that is the court's decision to make.

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


On the contrary I welcome the challenges and I welcome their day in court. I have no problem with the facts coming out. I found a source, but ATS blocks some links from being used, and being at work I did not have the time to hunt down a source ATS would not block. I will happily do so now.
www.ktnv.com...
www.nevadagop.org...
This is my original link, LVRJ is blocked by ATS for some reason. I added a space after lvrj., remove this space and the link will work.
www.lvrj.... com/news/clark-county-gop-continues-counting-verifying-caucus-votes-138746289.html

My problem was taking a small precinct with 200 people and then generalizing from that Ron Paul won all hand counted ballot counts. You can not take one small precinct and generalize from that. My assertion is that Ron Paul did not get a large portion of the popular vote, it overwhelmingly went to Romney. I believe this will hold up in any court case.Do I think there are grievances against Ron Paul supporters? Yes. Do I think Ron Paul supporters were looking to cause trouble in some cases? Yes. Does it make it right to do the wrong thing simply because they were causing trouble as well? No.

This has nothing to do with who won the popular vote, which is clearly Romney. If you are ok with subverting the will of the people because you believe you know better, come out and say it. If memory serves me correctly some of this debate is the result of a person stating electing Ron Paul would be fulfilling the will of the people, which is categorically false.