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

And now do you wish to acknowledge that every other poll by every other pollster since 2010 LAUGHS at Paul's "chances?"

And even better than polls are the actual primaries, the best polls.. He's lost all 22. He "almost won here" He "almost won there." Here is reality. Almost winning IS LOSING.

Paulobots engage in more imagineering than Walt Disney ever did.

Paul has LOST every vote in every state in 3 campaigns for the presidency.

That is reality.

EVERYTHING Paul supporters say and think is imaginary NONSENSE, totally at odds with any possible rational reality.

 

Why do you result to hyperbole and name calling? How does a poll "laugh" at...sigh...

The majority of Polls show Obama ahead of every Republican candidate. However, every 3 way poll shows Romney way behind Obama. The polls indicate, that Paul, in the reality of a 3-way race, has the best chance out of all 4 candidates.

As far as states, Paul has not won any of the popular votes, but it is likely he'll win the majority of delegates in many of the caucus states. Additionally, the delegates in other states are largely Paul supporters, so after the first round, they'll be voting for Paul.

The RNC is not decided by the popular vote, nor by who won the most states, it is decided by the delegates. That is who is voting. If Paul has a large number of delegates, and can win a majority of delegates at the convention, then he wins.

Please acknowledge that the RNC is decided by delegates and not by the popular votes at states. I need to know you understand how the process works before I talk to you about the process any deeper. Otherwise we are going to have to keep going over this until you get it.

And please stop resorting to name calling and hyperbole, because I have no idea how to respond to most of your comments.

And again I thank you for helping keep this thread going, hopefully more people will get a hold of the facts:

How the Process Works: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-O0jgRgo4I"]Reality Check: The real Republican delegate numbers - YouTube[/ame]

How Ron Paul can win it: http://freeindependentsun.com/repub...precincts-and-a-possible-brokered-convention/

 

Reality check for you!

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


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

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

NBC
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/politics/national/delegates/

Paul's best showing, RCP with 61 delegates. The polls laugh because Paul is a joke contender. NO ONE with a rational functioning brain has ever taken any of his constant ego driven runs for president, serious.

We could go on and on and get the same info. Paul is OUT, he was never in it. But mindlocked Paulobots live in a world as unrealistic as liberals.

 

The CNN Delegate Count you posted has Paul at 67 delegates.

However, I don't think you watched the video I posted that explains why all of the above delegate counts are wrong, or at least, merely predictions. Does it trouble you that there are 3 different sets of numbers out of the 4 sources you linked? Doesn't that suggest they aren't based on any verifiable measures? Otherwise, they'd all be the same, or at least, there would be a "correct" one.

Which one is correct? NYT and NBC? What are they basing these numbers on? Why are there 3 different sets of numbers?

If you watch the video I posted above, you'll know the answer to these questions.

 

Its not over till its over friends

 

i can guarantee you that ron paul won't be nominated by the gop

 

Another punch line in the long line of jokes that ARE the Paul Senatorial candidacy and the Presidential candidacy, and the Presidential candidacy again, and the Presidential candidacy again.

This long running, but always funny joke started in 84 when the sitting Republican Congressman Paul decided to run for the Senate,,,,,,,,,,and lost to a brand new Republican, fresh from the Democrat Party. Not having sufficient laughs for that fiasco, Paul elects to run for President for the first time in 88. To do so, Paul resigns from the Republican Party and joins the Libertarian Party. After garnering nearly a half of one percent of the vote. Paul leaves the Libertarian Party and re-becomes a Republican again. Was it Paulobots that complain so vociferously about flip-flopping? Yes I believe it is Paulobots that hate flip-flopping unless the oracle of nonsense, Paul is doing the flip-flopping.

And the joke has gone on for 2 more useless, wasteful, unproductive [Paul's career] Presidential runs. Paulobots are the only ones that don't get the 28 year long JOKE!

 

No, he won't, and he never expected to be.

None of the other candidates will be able to defeat PrezBO though, Paul was the only chance and most "conservatives" are too stupid to realize that.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_history_of_Abraham_Lincoln

A look at Abraham Lincoln's career shows some similar ups and downs.

He lost his first run at the Illinois House of Representatives., then was successful for a few terms. Then in 1844 he lost his Party's nomination for Congress, but won the seat the next election. He then won a seat back in the Illinois House in 54 but declined it to run for the U.S. Senate, an election he lost. He then ran for the Presidential Nomination of a new Third-Party and lost it...but was given the VP Nomination; the ticket lost. He then ran for the U.S. Senate as a Republican and lost.

Lincoln then, after suffering so many defeats (he even had a business fail and went through a nervous breakdown); decided to run once again for President as a Third-Party candidate...and won.

"Those who say it cannot be done shouldn’t interrupt the people doing it." - Chinese Proverb

"Take the first step in faith. You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step." - Martin Luther King Jr.

"In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity." - Albert Einstein

"I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move." - Matthew 17:20

"I really felt all along we should have been involved, and was taken aback that we were not. I think they were looking to avoid the council. I would have much preferred to be involved in the process than to look like a naysayer now." - Carol Schwartz

http://donna1978.hubpages.com/hub/how_to_deal_with_naysayers

Regarding Party Politics; when I was eleven I supported Ross Perot. At 18 I registered Reform Party. In 2000 I switched to Green and voted for Nader. In 2004 I registered Democrat to vote for Howard Dean; ultimately voting for Kerry as a "Any One But Bush" vote (I won't make the same mistake by voting "Any One But Obama"). In 2008 I registered Republican to vote for Ron Paul; ultimately voting for Cynthia McKinney (the Green Party Nominee). I then registered Green again. Last year I registered Republican to vote for Ron Paul in 2012.

Parties are irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is who will do the job of reforming our Government and directing out country in a better direction. The only thing that is relevant is the Republic. Voting is not a horse-race. It is not a game. It is a poll of what you believe to be the best policy, and the best candidate. If what is right is unpopular; you still need to vote for what is right, otherwise no one will ever know anyone believed in what was right...

"Lincoln will never be President...NEVER!" - Nay-sayer circa 1860

 

Another punch line in the never ending joke that is the career politician Paul.

 

the only joke is you, believing that the republicans will deliver you something of value.

 

A rational approach to foreign policy is quite valuable.

 

let me know when that happens.

Long live the petrodollar.

 

It's already happening.

 

I'm interested in what you mean by "rational approach to foreign policy" so I started a separate thread for us (and others) to discuss it:

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...l-approach-foreign-policy.html#post1060989097

 

Following the rules of the GOP is not hijacking anything.

 

Exactly. It should be noted that Senator Obama did not win the Popular vote in the Democratic Primary, but instead won the majority of Delegates. At the time, it was also very much a possibility that if Senator Clinton had challenged him at the convention, being that many of his delegates were not "bound" that she would have won the Nomination. I believe she understood that such a move would have hurt her candidacy as it would have been seen as being about power rather than policy concern. The General Election may have very well gone to McCain in that case.

However, Paul pulling off a similar upset would do the opposite, as his candidacy is much more about policy differences with the other candidates, and less about personal power. A Paul Nomination would be a relief to the people, and would increase his support, rather than be looked at as "infighting" and negative.

 

let's say hell freezes over and delegates at the tampa convention vote for ron paul

you realize that the gop bosses can reject the delegate's vote result and tell them to try again, right?

what a joke, ron paul hasn't won any state primaries, not one

 

No, I didn't know that. Can you help me find where it says that in the GOP rules?

http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf

The Rep. Nat. Comm. can only call another vote if no candidate has a majority of delegates. Unless there is something I missed.

 

OK ... I'll play long.I don't know what Paul's economic plan
constitutes,short of Eliminating the Fed and cutting One Trillion
from Spending.It seems his economic plan included things like
redressing all foreign aid to countries.That's not a plan.
Anyway ... Paul talk likes that.Includes spendings cuts
as part of his jobs plan,fer starters.

 

here's what you need to know: ron paul won't be nominated by the gop

 

wow, you must be clever to figure that out all by yourself.

But you are scared as hell of him setting stage for a three way split in the future. The cornerstone of your corporatist establishment depends on that not happening.

 

clearly obvious, as the western currencies compete in a mad dash to the bottom.

Political stooges everywhere, and not a drop of sanity to drink.

 

Paul was never a factor.It was unfair to have the pundits and
journalist snub him,but in hindsight it was warranted.Paul with
22 delegates and no primary wins.A fanclub does not make
a serious candidate.It's Wins and overall appeal.I know Paul
has a substantial following,but again so did Ralph Nader.
Paul isn't even half as popular as Ross Perot.
He's just a So-So Congressman who made poor choices
as a Representative.He chose to be a Lone Wolf,the Bernie Sanders
of Conservatism and now he's paying the price.Plus he become
somewhat ruthless in the last half year.

 

yes, and the "serious" candidates will continue to screw you six ways from sunday, and you will vote for them, thinking you are winning something.