MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Politics and Government > Why not Ron Paul, exactly?


Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 31   Go Down

Author Topic: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?  (Read 13468 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1482
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #345 on: April 27, 2012, 01:41:08 AM »

Paul has 20 delegates in Minnesota not 9 or whatever cnn says.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/04/23/ron_paul_wins_minnesota_delegates_by_a_landslide.html

Paul has a lot of pledged support from Iowa delegates. So obviously CNN's count in Iowa is wrong.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/ron-paul-wins-in-iowa-and-minnesota-romney-in-a-panic/


Paul won the majority of delegates in Washington so why does CNN say that Romney won it?

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/333906/20120426/ron-paul-2012-delegates-news-romney-convention.htm

Obviously there is a lot of BS going on behind the scenes. Like I said before, let's just wait and see who winds up with the nomination. It's not as clear cut as the media is leading us to believe.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8670
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #346 on: April 27, 2012, 08:09:00 AM »

Paul has 20 delegates in Minnesota not 9 or whatever cnn says.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/04/23/ron_paul_wins_minnesota_delegates_by_a_landslide.html

Paul has a lot of pledged support from Iowa delegates. So obviously CNN's count in Iowa is wrong.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/ron-paul-wins-in-iowa-and-minnesota-romney-in-a-panic/


Paul won the majority of delegates in Washington so why does CNN say that Romney won it?

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/333906/20120426/ron-paul-2012-delegates-news-romney-convention.htm

Obviously there is a lot of BS going on behind the scenes. Like I said before, let's just wait and see who winds up with the nomination. It's not as clear cut as the media is leading us to believe.


Welcome to the Washington State Republican Party’s Precinct Caucus website
100% reporting (6785/6785)
Romney      37.6%     19,111             30 delegates
Paul            24.8%      12,594               5 delegates
Santorum    23.8%      12,089               5 delegates

http://wsrpcaucus.tumblr.com/
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/states/washington

I can find only a few repeats or selected portions of...  tracking back it comes from this article...

In short, the Ron Paul strategy is to install dedicated delegates rather than win popular votes.  The article states he “won” by getting one DISTRICT delegate put in place.

Quote
Earlier this week in Iowa and Minnesota, Ron Paul’s covert, submarine delegate strategy paid off. Iowa has 28 total delegates that it can award, and one of those delegates is the state chairman, a Ron Paul supporter. Paul also picked up 13 delegates from the state’s nomination committee, which decided yesterday to go for Ron Paul. Weeks after the Iowa race was called for Rick Santorum, Paul’s grinding delegate game has paid off, and at the very worst, he will earn half of Iowa’s delegates.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/7460/ron-paul-wins-washington-on-track-to-be-nominated-at-gop-convention  (that appears to be where the distortions originate.. and it is a really deceptive headline.)

I found plenty of other reputable places besides the OFFICIAL one that said the same numbers.  Repeating the LIE that Paul won the majority of the states popular votes or delegates is really, really wrong.

The claim that his strategy of installing Paul loyalists as delegates is working, as the article shows.  In Minnesota Santorum got 44.9% of the popular vote, Paul got 27.2%, and Romney got 16.9% and yet, having a great deal of Paul loyalist delegates he was awarded 20 of 24.
 http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012/02/full-missouri-minnesota-and-colorado-results-santorum-sweeps/

An interesting strategy.  I find it very sad that the wishes of the people (popular vote) can so easily be corrupted so badly.
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

Professor H

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6895
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #347 on: April 27, 2012, 09:27:26 AM »

Paul has 20 delegates in Minnesota not 9 or whatever cnn says.

blogs[/b]/weigel/2012/04/23/ron_paul_wins_minnesota_delegates_by_a_landslide.html]http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/04/23/ron_paul_wins_minnesota_delegates_by_a_landslide.html

Paul has a lot of pledged support from Iowa delegates. So obviously CNN's count in Iowa is wrong.

http://dougwead.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/ron-paul-wins-in-iowa-and-minnesota-romney-in-a-panic/


Paul won the majority of delegates in Washington so why does CNN say that Romney won it?

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/333906/20120426/ron-paul-2012-delegates-news-romney-convention.htm

Obviously there is a lot of BS going on behind the scenes. Like I said before, let's just wait and see who winds up with the nomination. It's not as clear cut as the media is leading us to believe.

Aha - the "secret" delegates that I mentioned ... 

   The Texas libertarian has based his entire 2012 presidential campaign on the ability to win over state delegates — rather than winning the popular vote.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/7460/ron-paul-wins-washington-on-track-to-be-nominated-at-gop-convention

Combine that strategy with a blog and all the sudden the media is "wrong" ???

I wouldn't rely on a blog as a reputable source - it will only get your hopes up...  kind of a group think where you all sit around and agree even though you don't have actual facts or data...

Definition of BLOG   http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blog
: a Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer...

In other words Blogs are Opinions ...   
CNN FOX CBS NBC ABC BBC....   while sometimes biased on how they present them - they at least present FACTS.

In fact why doesn't he just run on the Libertarian ticket - probably easier to muscle his way in - or will his secret society fall apart if he does?
Logged
First, it was not a strip bar, it was an erotic club. And second, what can I say? I'm a night owl.
Marion Berry

But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.
Nancy Pelosi

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1482
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #348 on: April 27, 2012, 09:47:42 AM »

Aha - the "secret" delegates that I mentioned ... 

   The Texas libertarian has based his entire 2012 presidential campaign on the ability to win over state delegates — rather than winning the popular vote.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/7460/ron-paul-wins-washington-on-track-to-be-nominated-at-gop-convention

Combine that strategy with a blog and all the sudden the media is "wrong" ???

I wouldn't rely on a blog as a reputable source - it will only get your hopes up...  kind of a group think where you all sit around and agree even though you don't have actual facts or data...

Definition of BLOG   http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blog
: a Web site that contains an online personal journal with reflections, comments, and often hyperlinks provided by the writer...

In other words Blogs are Opinions ...   
CNN FOX CBS NBC ABC BBC....   while sometimes biased on how they present them - they at least present FACTS.

In fact why doesn't he just run on the Libertarian ticket - probably easier to muscle his way in - or will his secret society fall apart if he does?


Just google "Ron Paul wins Washington" or "Ron Paul wins Iowa and Minnesota" You'll get over 100 million hits. Just because CNN and FOX aren't reporting it doesn't mean it's not happening.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1482
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #349 on: April 27, 2012, 09:49:43 AM »

Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

Professor H

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6895
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #350 on: April 27, 2012, 10:16:04 AM »

If you're claim is that Paul will win ALL the "unbound" delegates...  good luck,
I admire your devotion and support.

It is interesting if true - that anyone would pay any time or attention to Iowa, if they don't really have to follow any rules or can decide later who they really want....

Could end up costing them in the future if word gets out...  Iowa doesn't really matter  8)
---------------------------------------------------
Iowa will eventually elect delegates to the Republican Convention, but only a tiny percentage of the total—28 out of 2,286, which is 1.2%. And even these are “unbound” delegates, which means they can change their allegiance when they get Tampa in August.

So why does Iowa fight to maintain its caucuses as “first in the nation” when it determines nothing? In politics, always follow the money:

It’s estimated that in 2008 more than $51 million was spent in the state on ads, headquarter rentals, hotels, food, transportation, etc. The candidates have spent more than $2.4 million and counting on ads alone in this election cycle.

In conclusion, Iowans would like to thank you for staying up all night.
http://americanvisionnews.com/998/surprise-iowa-delegates-arent-chosen-until-june
Logged
First, it was not a strip bar, it was an erotic club. And second, what can I say? I'm a night owl.
Marion Berry

But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.
Nancy Pelosi

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8670
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #351 on: April 27, 2012, 10:32:23 AM »

Just google "Ron Paul wins Washington" or "Ron Paul wins Iowa and Minnesota" You'll get over 100 million hits. Just because CNN and FOX aren't reporting it doesn't mean it's not happening.
Yes, 100 million re-posts of the exact same blog post over and over or a regurgitation of that same exact post.  One was a business page that had no source, just the claim alone with no support. 

I am not saying that you can't be correct, but gosh, give something real to work with.
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

LetsGoWings

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #352 on: April 27, 2012, 12:08:31 PM »

Maybe I messed up, but I only got ~45,000,000 hits for "Ron Paul Iowa".

On the other hand "Mitt Romney Iowa" generates ~68,000,000 hits.

"Newt Gingrich Iowa" ~38,000,000 hits

The only candidate that had a chance for a brokered convention was Santorum. Paul is not close at all, and his showing in the primary shows he does not deserve the nomination. Here is my question USS, why do you not want the majority to determine who is on the Republican ticket?
Logged
Great advice from another poster on this forum, we should all live by this:

"I'd advise against anyone contemplating sullying the reputation of any of the candidates without solid proof. "

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1482
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #353 on: April 27, 2012, 12:47:34 PM »

Maybe I messed up, but I only got ~45,000,000 hits for "Ron Paul Iowa".

On the other hand "Mitt Romney Iowa" generates ~68,000,000 hits.

"Newt Gingrich Iowa" ~38,000,000 hits

The only candidate that had a chance for a brokered convention was Santorum. Paul is not close at all, and his showing in the primary shows he does not deserve the nomination. Here is my question USS, why do you not want the majority to determine who is on the Republican ticket?

I don't have a problem with the majority choosing the candidate they want. Sadly that's not how it always works out, even in the presidential elections. Is it fair the electoral college essentially makes the popular vote useless? Of course not, and I hate to see it happen.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1482
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #354 on: April 27, 2012, 12:51:09 PM »

Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

LetsGoWings

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #355 on: April 27, 2012, 02:08:01 PM »

I don't have a problem with the majority choosing the candidate they want. Sadly that's not how it always works out, even in the presidential elections. Is it fair the electoral college essentially makes the popular vote useless? Of course not, and I hate to see it happen.
Either way you slice it, with the way the votes have gone, and most likely will continue to go, why should Romney not be the nominee? He is killing in the delegate count, votes, and states carried. There is about a 99.999999999% chance that Romney will be the nominee, and the only way he will not be is if a catastrophic event happens.
Logged
Great advice from another poster on this forum, we should all live by this:

"I'd advise against anyone contemplating sullying the reputation of any of the candidates without solid proof. "

Baby Hitler

  • Guest
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #356 on: April 27, 2012, 02:11:22 PM »


Just don't put it in your signature, someone will have a conniption fit.
Logged

LetsGoWings

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1585
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #357 on: April 27, 2012, 02:14:21 PM »

Just don't put it in your signature, someone will have a conniption fit.
Can't provide anything relevant to the discussion so you need to take a jab?
Logged
Great advice from another poster on this forum, we should all live by this:

"I'd advise against anyone contemplating sullying the reputation of any of the candidates without solid proof. "

Baby Hitler

  • Guest
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #358 on: April 27, 2012, 03:16:17 PM »

Can't provide anything relevant to the discussion so you need to take a jab?
Sorry, did I hit you below the belt? I was commenting on his picture, if you don't like it, get bent.
Logged

Baggins

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3220
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #359 on: April 27, 2012, 03:17:07 PM »

Ron Paul has a better chance of winning the Democratic convention this year than he does the GOP's.

No, he doesn't... :o

Logged
"Praise not the day until evening has come,
 A sword until it is tried,
 A maiden until she is married,
 Ice until it has been crossed,
 Beer until it has been drunk!" - (Viking proverb)
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 [24] 25 26 ... 31   Go Up