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


Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 31   Go Down

Author Topic: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?  (Read 13440 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SMASH

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4558
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #315 on: April 25, 2012, 12:10:16 AM »

I admire your devotion to Mr. Paul.  However; the only time I ever hear this brokered convention stuff is from Paul supporters.

Well that should not be suprising at all.

The media will not report it cause they as well as the VAST majority of Republicans have NO CLUE how the Party mechanisms operate. They have no clue, nor evidently, no desire to know HOW their Party is ran, nor by whom.
Just like the Democrats.
Oh, and don't be confused there is NOTHING Democratic about them!
They have no interest in being democratic about anything! They are a top down institution just like the Republicans.

OBEY

Duopoly in action!

Logged

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #316 on: April 25, 2012, 09:26:07 AM »

Funny how I can't even find anything about the primaries on either CNN, FOXNEWS, or YAHOO. It's all Romney vs Obama.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

JL

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2255
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #317 on: April 25, 2012, 12:54:39 PM »

"I Think Ron Paul Just Won Iowa!" Rachel Maddow April 23, 2012

Funny how I can't even find anything about the primaries on either CNN, FOXNEWS, or YAHOO. It's all Romney vs Obama.

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #318 on: April 25, 2012, 01:02:27 PM »

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

JL

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2255
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #319 on: April 25, 2012, 01:04:47 PM »

sorry.  missed it.  thought it was pertinent.  funny how politics works (or doesn't work). 

I posted that video on the previous page.

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #320 on: April 25, 2012, 04:38:56 PM »

sorry.  missed it.  thought it was pertinent.  funny how politics works (or doesn't work). 


It's no big deal. It's probably good to have it on every page, and yes it's funny how the media had already nominated Romney for us.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

TLaitur

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 427
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #321 on: April 26, 2012, 11:00:18 AM »

it's funny how the media had already nominated Romney for us.

Believe as you chose.  However the numbers seem to confirm that it is over for Mr. Paul.

Romney had a total of 824 delegates – just 320 shy of the 1,144 delegates it will take to win the Republican nomination. With former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum out of the race, Romney could collect the needed delegates by the end of May.

To date; Mr. Paul has 79 deligates. 

As Mary Chapin Carpenter liked to say, "the stars might lie but the numbers never do."

Logged

Professor H

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6877
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #322 on: April 26, 2012, 12:56:56 PM »

Supporters of Paul are and Paul himslef are clinging on
  Hmmm   Klingons...


When asked why he keeps running... They reply:
What's happening? -------qaStaH nuq?
I don't understand. ------- jIyajbe'

There's a time and a place to let your ego go, and let the process move forward.
Many well respected politicians over the years have done this with a greater number of delegates - recognizing the need for the party to move on to the general elecction.
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

SMASH

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4558
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #323 on: April 26, 2012, 01:49:59 PM »

Believe as you chose.  However the numbers seem to confirm that it is over for Mr. Paul.

Romney had a total of 824 delegates – just 320 shy of the 1,144 delegates it will take to win the Republican nomination. With former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum out of the race, Romney could collect the needed delegates by the end of May.

To date; Mr. Paul has 79 deligates. 

As Mary Chapin Carpenter liked to say, "the stars might lie but the numbers never do."



OK, I don't know where you are getting your delegate numbers, and it really don't matter.

Take a look at Reality Check.

Let's take a peek at what the GOP is really doing to try and lie there way to Tampa and attempt to give the nomination to Romney.

http://www.fox19.com/story/17768724/reality-check-infighting-at-more-gop-caucuses-and-what-the-msm-wont-tell-you-about-iowa-and-minnesota
Logged

ducksoup

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8663
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #324 on: April 26, 2012, 01:54:08 PM »

Can someone explain to me how this is different than the rest of the long chain of voting "anything but Rmoney?"   If Paul drops out does Abner Figglebottom, or some other low level candidate no one has heard of then get the "not Rmoney" vote?
Logged
After one taste, you'll duck soup the rest of your life ... Groucho Marx.

Professor H

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6877
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #325 on: April 26, 2012, 02:05:34 PM »

OK, I don't know where you are getting your delegate numbers, and it really don't matter.
You mean it doesn't matter cause he's clinging on no matter what?

Paul and Gingrich combined don't even have the delegates that Santorum had - and he was finally wise enough to drop out...  ;)

It's not too hard to find:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/calculator/

TOTAL DELEGATES   (as of today)

Mitt Romney
Pledged*: 792
Unpledged RNC*: 49
Total: 841

Newt Gingrich
Pledged*: 138
Unpledged RNC*: 3
Total: 141

Ron Paul
Pledged*: 76
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 76

Rick Santorum
Pledged*: 273
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 273
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r

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

T-M-T

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3951
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #326 on: April 26, 2012, 02:12:15 PM »

Take a look at Reality Check.

Let's take a peek at what the GOP is really doing to try and lie there way to Tampa and attempt to give the nomination to Romney.


So the Republicans are into some shady stuff.  No one is holding a gun to Ron Paul’s head forcing him to be a Republican.  Why doesn’t he tell them to take a hike and run as an independent?

Maybe he can even win a few caucus states through technicalities.  What about the winner-take-all primaries where he was trounced in the popular vote?  Anyone with any sense realizes he has zero chance even if he is given every disputed delegate in the caucus States. 

It’s the end of September and your baseball team is 45 games out of a playoff spot.  Go ahead and argue about a couple bad calls made against you in April and May.  It’s pointless and makes you look foolish.  You lost.  Accept it.
Logged

ussoccer26

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1481
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #327 on: April 26, 2012, 02:15:13 PM »

You mean it doesn't matter cause he's clinging on no matter what?

Paul and Gingrich combined don't even have the delegates that Santorum had - and he was finally wise enough to drop out...  ;)

It's not too hard to find:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/calculator/

TOTAL DELEGATES   (as of today)

Mitt Romney
Pledged*: 792
Unpledged RNC*: 49
Total: 841

Newt Gingrich
Pledged*: 138
Unpledged RNC*: 3
Total: 141

Ron Paul
Pledged*: 76
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 76

Rick Santorum
Pledged*: 273
Unpledged RNC*: 0
Total: 273
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r



Those numbers are wrong. Paul has 13 in Iowa and at least 22 in Minnesota. How about we just let the dust settle and see who standing after it's all said and done, instead of pushing what's best for the party or whatever BS they're calling it.

Here is three reasons Ron Paul won't call it quits.

1. Have ya'll ever heard of a brokered convention?

2. Ron Paul isn't a team player and he isn't looking for a spot on Romney's staff.

3. Ron Paul is spreading his message of Libertarianism and this will only help him gain exposure.
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: 1481
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #328 on: April 26, 2012, 02:17:08 PM »

So the Republicans are into some shady stuff.  No one is holding a gun to Ron Paul’s head forcing him to be a Republican.  Why doesn’t he tell them to take a hike and run as an independent?

Maybe he can even win a few caucus states through technicalities.  What about the winner-take-all primaries where he was trounced in the popular vote?  Anyone with any sense realizes he has zero chance even if he is given every disputed delegate in the caucus States. 

It’s the end of September and your baseball team is 45 games out of a playoff spot.  Go ahead and argue about a couple bad calls made against you in April and May.  It’s pointless and makes you look foolish.  You lost.  Accept it.


Using baseball analogies makes you look foolish. Accept it.
Logged
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

T-M-T

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3951
Re: Why not Ron Paul, exactly?
« Reply #329 on: April 26, 2012, 02:38:37 PM »

I guess we’ll see who’s foolish at the end of the Republican convention when Romney emerges as the nominee.  Maybe they’ll give Ron Paul a speaking slot if he’s lucky and agrees to play by the rules of his chosen party.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 31   Go Up