Ron Paul wins Iowa

This whole election has been a sham. I am embarrassed to be an American today.
 
I have never been embarrassed to be an American. I have been embarrassed by an American many times over. Mitt Romney was not my 1st choice for candidate, but neither was Ron Paul.

As long as Obama is defeated, my glass will again be half full.

I hope I'm not embarrassed by the American voters, again.

But on the subject of Ron Paul. If he won every delegate that is left, he would still not have enough delegates to win the nomination outright.
 
Interesting ploy to despirited the conservative movement from voting in the November elections. I am convinced that is why the Elites push and funded Ron Paul, to disrupt and dissolve the conservatives that would have naturally pulled together under a strong conservative candidate. I suspect that Ron Paul will find the funding to run as an independent to further polarize the conservative base to help insure Obama's re-election.

Romney was not my first, second, or even third choice as a GOP nomination. The only thing I ask from him is to pick conservatives for the USSC since that is the last firewall we have of complete corruption of our laws and constitution by the Progressives. Yes Fluffy, I'm voting for Elite chosen Romney because he isn't a Marxist and he doesn't eat dog. Two big perks in my book.
 
The people that actually know, care. They are beating the money with dedicated people. Believe it's a plot to get the Democrats back in if that is the feeble plot the PR companies you plug into are feeding you - the elites will take Romney or Obama - they don't care that much. The energy companies would rather have Romney, the Banks will swing either way - some elites prefer Romney, some elites prefer Obama. Almost none of them want Paul but ordinary Americans in large numbers are willing to work very hard to get Paul and his agenda into the debate and perhaps even the White House.
 
Dammy said:
Yes Fluffy, I'm voting for Elite chosen Romney because he isn't a Marxist and he doesn't eat dog. Two big perks in my book.
Click to expand...

Two insignificant perks because it does not markedly differentiate him from the field. While Obama has eaten dog it is not at all clear that he still does. He can certainly afford not to. Mitt never had to and Paul - probably not a puppy muncher either. None of the candidates are Marxist despite what the smear campaigns might suggest. Any Marxist in the office would have had the body guards called off of the back of his limo by now.

Mitt can't beat Obama but Paul could because he appeals to the young Democrats who were disappointed by Obama but Romney just scares them.

Besides, Romney couldn't even beat Paul in his home state. Ron Paul has a following and has drawn a lot of people along with him. He is a player and I think it's important for word to get out because that makes it harder for the elites to ignore him at the convention - and they DO want to ignore him. They've been ignoring him and hoping he would go away for years.

 
If the fact that someone eaten meat which came from an animal that you haven't (simply through culture, unless you're veggie) is enough to stop you voting for them, I'd recommend you re-evaluate your priorities.

On the other hand, the pragmatic side of me says, it doesn't really matter who you vote for. Given how much of an empty trackie Obama has turned out to be, it might as well be Romney.

In fact, I think I might even start rooting for him.

Go Romney!
Woooo!
USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! ......
 
Ron Paul is doing so well the party elites are starting to openly panic.
Ron Paul has been able to get wide support from Occupy and Tea Party alike. While the sides have very different stances on what they think government should do they are in agreement that what they really want is for the government to be back in the hands of the people.
 
It is always fun to watch non Americans tell US voters how the US voting system works.
When Romney accumulates 297 of the remaining 962 delegates, the decision will have been made on who will represent the Republican party in November. That will probably come before the end of this month.

At that point Ron Paul can either shut up, or try to be a spoiler to get Obama elected. Those are his only two choices. He is not going to be the Republican nominee therefore he is not going to be President. Those are just facts. It doesn't matter how the Socialist/Progressives try to spin it, the nomination process will be over.

Like I said though, it is fun to watch you folks grab at your own smoke and mirrors.

Look at this chart and ask yourself which supporters were the first to figure it out, and which are the last.
 
Fade said:
It is always fun to watch non Americans tell US voters how the US voting system works.
When Romney accumulates 297 of the remaining 962 delegates, the decision will have been made on who will represent the Republican party in November. That will probably come before the end of this month.
Click to expand...

Interesting to see the breakdown there. New York went clearly to Romney. Shows you what kind of a Republican Romney is.

But it looks like they have spread around the unbound delegates and attached them to non Ron Paul candidates.

Now, it's true that if Romney get's his delegates then he wraps it up but many of the bound delegates are Paul delegates so if they get to second round there are a lot more Paul votes than delegate count shows.

The delegate picture is foggier than it is portrayed. From Fox
 
@Fluffy:

So the RNC are breaking their own rules?
Begs the question of why RP would even remain a party member.
 
Robert said:
@Fluffy:

So the RNC are breaking their own rules?
Begs the question of why RP would even remain a party member.
Click to expand...
Because you can't do anything outside of the two parties. They have a lock on the system.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Because you can't do anything outside of the two parties. They have a lock on the system.
Click to expand...

Indeed and principles be damned.
It shows up that brand of democracy as a rigged sham.
 
Robert you are still grasping at straws because you do not understand some of the basics.

These are not state or federal laws that all parties are bound to. These are rules that are set up by each individual party, and do not affect what a different party may have set up for their own rules.

Here is an example. Look at Texas and California near the bottom of the list.
Neither state has voted yet. But you will see that California shows 1 vote for Romney already.
Texas does not have any votes for anyone.
The difference is because the California Republican party allows for a Super Delegate and apparently Texas does not.
It could be the exact opposite in Democrat party rules, where they might allow Super Delegates in Texas but not in California.
Another example is Florida.
The Republican National Committee (RNC) has their own rules that affect every state voting process. Florida shot themselves in the foot this time, because they broke RNC rules. Florida jumped out of line on their primary election date, and voted early. Florida is now being punished for doing that. The RNC is only going to count half of the delegates in the first round of counting delegates.

Each and every party, whether they be Republican, Democrat, Socialist, or Communist, is free to set up their own rules for their own nomination process no matter how stupid or draconian you might think those rules are.
It's called freedom.
It seems odd that you and Fluffy, with your socialist leaning philosophy would reject the freedoms that these rules allow. I guess that y'all don't really have the conviction of belief that you continually spout.

On second thought, maybe that's not odd at all.;)
 
You say I'm grasping at straws and rejecting freedom, yet neglected to mention which straws and have completely misrepresented me regarding the supposed rejection of freedom.
 
Fade said:
It seems odd that you and Fluffy, with your socialist leaning philosophy would reject the freedoms that these rules allow.
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about. I was talking about the rules (and how the parties don't necessarily follow their rules if they are not convenient. It has nothing to do with if anyone has rules or not and whether they are allowed to - it's whether they have the honesty to follow their own rules.
 
Gosh, how hard can this be. There are fifty states in the US. The rules in every state can be different. There are also rules by the RNC. So on any given rule, there can be 50 different state rules, plus US territories are also allowed to vote in primaries, so add those in, and add the final one for the RNC.

Now add to that, each and every party can do exactly the same thing. They set their own rules for the nomination process. Robert when I said "you do not understand some of the basics" that is what I am talking about. You can't make a blanket statement of "they don't follow their own rules" because it is a meaningless statement.

Here is an example.
The Communist party doesn't hold a primary. A committee of a few dozen selects the nominee and that is it.
That is their rule and they are happy with it. So is everyone else. But if they were held to the same rules of say the Democratic party, then there would never be a Communist in the election.
 
Fade said:
Gosh, how hard can this be.
Click to expand...
You keep trying to "clarify" things for me but you seem to be doing this by ignoring what I said and then talking about something else entirely.

There are fifty states in the US. The rules in every state can be different. There are also rules by the RNC.
Click to expand...
I pretty much said that. I don't think you noticed but that is not in dispute. However, and first of all, the RNC rules are the governing rules for everyone and while states can have their own rules they cannot contradict RNC rules. If you don't want to play by RNC rules then why are you in the RNC?

States can make whatever rules they wish and some of the rule making happens at the convention but those rules are subservient to the RNC rules and must comply. On top of those rules they can make their own compatible rules.

Even the states can't seem to keep to their own rules, it seems, when Ron Paul supporters show up who know what the rules are and how to use them.

But the bigger question I was mentioning above is whether the RNC will hold to it's own rule 38 that says that states cannot bind their delegates - or will they ignore this rule. It doesn't matter if states decide to bind their candidates, the RNC rules say that they cannot do it so the RNC rule should overrule the state rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top