How Ron Paul Wins the Nomination: A break-down of delegates and a brokered convention

Paul's funding has slipped considerably. He's finished.

 

as i've said since this sort of thing began happening in 2008, the gop leaders aren't going to sit around and let a small vocal minority hijack their party

ron paul won't be nominated by the gop and will never be president, no matter what bs you post

 

Did he ever really get started?

 

That depends on who you ask.

His supporters will tell you he already won the election.

 

What exactly about his policies do you not like? Let's say for example...his stance on taxes.

Do you disagree we should be paying a lower tax rate? Do you disagree that the income tax is absurd and should be abolished?

 

Maybe in some cases, and no. I believe in the role of government, so why would I not believe in funding it?

 

44.27% of the delegates have been awarded, Paul has 2.9% of them, or 1.1%, depending on which tabulator one wants to believe.

Winning? Yeah, Paul and Charlie Sheen, Winning!


http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/delegates

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/R

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/scorecard/statebystate/r

http://projects.wsj.com/campaign2012/delegates/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/primary-elec...?party=R&tag=breakingnews;electionsticker

http://www.gop.com/index.php/comms/comments/updated_delegate_count_3.16.2012

 

How large of a role of government do you prefer?

 

That's a pretty broad question because the answer is always going to be situational. For example, I think we should nationalize our energy industry just like Venezuela, yes Hugo Chavez, did. I think all industries vital down to the most basic functions of our economy and our nation should not be for profit industries.

I also think the government oversteps it's bound sometimes. Obviously the NDAA is, and SOPA was, horrible. I don't want the government involved in the internet at all.

I do generally believe in public assistance programs paid for by taxes from everyone. I know they can be a mixed bag of benefits and problems, and won't deny reforms are necessary in some areas. But I believe in the intent and the benefits of it.

And I don't mind paying taxes to support government's role. I don't agree with everything they do, but I don't disagree with everything either. I'm a moderate, maybe slightly left of center.

I don't want Ron Paul dismantling the government. I don't want his foreign policy. And I don't want the states making up thousands of new laws unique to themselves, creating a situation where we might as well just change the name of our country to, The States of America.

 

Why do you think he would dismantle the government? I agree with him that we should maintain a government...but it should be as small as possible. I don't understand how people think he is going to completely remove government all together. We don't need 3/4 of the iron fist we have right now.

 

I just don't believe in minimalist government. And I don't really feel like there is an iron fist.

 

I agree with the exception of the IRS. That agency could use some downsizing.

As for the "iron fist," I just don't see it.

 

I'd be happy to continue paying my current tax rate as long as the administration balances the budget.

 

Back to Topic:

Looks like the Georgia GOP is breaking the rules to prevent their Caucuses from being "hijack" by those following the rules...

http://www.fox19.com/story/17216091...art=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=6864968

 

Another on topic article:

http://communities.washingtontimes....n-paul-benefits-brokered-convention-jay-leno/

 

More on the Missouri caucus.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00OSwmm1Jto&feature=player_embedded"]Ron Paul supporters get angry - YouTube[/ame]

 

hijacking isn't legal, a hijacking is when one or a few men seize control of a vehicle full of people and take them to a place they don't want to go

in this case the hijackers are a small minority of ron paul supports and the vehicle is the primary election process

elections are a process whereby the winner is determined by a majority of votes, more or less

no matter how many times ron paulogist claim they're following the rules, it flies in the face of justice, people instinctively know that hijacking is wrong

the gop leadership won't allow their party to be hijacked by a few radical lunatics and ron paul won't be nominated by the gop


hijack

illegally seize (an aircraft, ship, or vehicle) in transit and force it to go to a different destination or use it for one's own purposes: three armed men hijacked a white van

• steal (goods) by seizing them in transit.

• take over (something) and use it for a different purpose: the organization had been hijacked by extremists.


vehicle

1 a thing used for transporting people or goods, esp. on land, such as a car, truck, or cart.

2 a thing used to express, embody, or fulfill something: I use paint as a vehicle for my ideas.

• the figurative language used in a metaphor, as distinct from the metaphor's subject.

what do you think russia tv's agenda is in the usa?

 

Please elaborate on the "more or less." Sounds like you are inferring that elections follow more complex rules than simply "majority wins."

 

i don't think i have to explain how the process works

what i wrote is quite clear, ron paul won't be able to weasel his way into the nomination without winning any primary elections

 

That isn't exactly correct.

Ron Paul only needs to have the plurality of delegates in 5 states to qualify for the first round ballot for the Nomination. It is likely he will have that through the Caucus Process that is going on right now (despite attempts to stop him).

And you should explain your understanding of the process more clearly, so that we know what we are working with.

The process is not "more or less" determined by who wins the majority of votes. You know that right?

The Nomination is decided by who can win a majority of delegates at the convention. The Primaries are state-by-state processes of helping get a feel of the public's view, and then, sometimes completely independent of that view, a process of electing delegates to send to the national convention.

To get placed on the ballot in the first round at the convention a candidate must have the plurality (most) of delegates in five states, not the majority vote in those states' Primaries, but the plurality of delegates representing those states at the national convention.

The 2012 GOP Primary is an education on that process, much like the 2000 election was an education process on the fact that the popular vote doesn't determine who actually wins the General Election, but the Electoral College (which again, is a state-by-state process of sending electors to a national convention).

The President is elected by the States, not the People. Congress is elected by the People directly. It is the only national office that is. Even the Senate is suppose to be elected by the State Legislatures (prior to the 17th amendment).

The reason for these processes is to restrict the powers of the majority. The is the basis of a Republic (over a Democracy). We are a Republic. We have a balance of powers, and a representative democracy, not a direct democracy.

So, to express my need, I need to know that you are actually involved in this intellectually and not just emotionally.

The Nominee does not need to represent the preference of the registered Republican popular vote. In fact, in times when that preference leads to the Nomination of a candidate that is backed by the same interest that the President is, it is our duty to insure that the Nominee does not represent that preference.

Especially after Romney's senior advisor said that the candidate can simply change his positions to get elected whenever he wants, and that Romney has no problem lying about his positions, putting him in office, and even giving him the nomination, is assurance that the Policies of the current administration, as they are simply policies of special interests pushed onto the administration (as they were under Bush), will not change.

 

REGARDLESS what Ron Paul supporters do in any and every caucus, The ONLY issue that determines whether Paul finishes 3rd or 4th is whether Gingrich drops out or stays in. If Newt stays IN, Paul finishes 4th in the primaries.

There is NO logical, rational, illogical, irrational, wildly insane, or alternate universe where Paul even approaches winning.

 

yes, in a case where candidate 1 has 49% and candidate 2 has 51%, candidate 1 may be able to be elected

but, where candidate 1 has 89% and candidate 2 has 11%, candidate 1 will most assuredly win


2012 Republican Presidential Nomination Poll

paul - 10.9%

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

 

People also never thought a Foreign exchange student turned 1 term Senator would become President either.

 

the difference is that he got there by winning the popular vote, not trying to hijack caucuses

 

NO, the difference is he was selected not elected.