or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Republican Party Nominee... ūüĎÄ ...Ron Paul?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Republican Party Nominee... ūüĎÄ ...Ron Paul?

post #1 of 95
Thread Starter 

Is Mitt¬†Romney Ron Paul on the way to winning the Republican nomination‚ĚĒ

 

I thought it wasn't possible, but apparently it is very possible. Thirty states allow their delegates to vote for the winner of the popular vote or for their candidate of choice. Most of the other states have a free choice after the initial balloting. Delegates who want Ron Paul to win, but aren't allowed to vote for him, due to the popular vote rules in some of the states can abstain. And if you think Ron Paul's not winning, or going to win enough delegates, think again. Ron Paul is clearly in the running still.

 

Here's how it works-

 

 

"Despite what you may have heard from the mainstream media, Mitt Romney does not have the Republican nomination locked up.¬† In fact, he is rapidly losing delegates that almost everyone assumed that he already had in the bag.¬† To understand why this is happening, you have to understand the delegate selection process.¬† Each state has different rules for selecting delegates to the Republican national convention, and in many states the ‚Äúvoting‚ÄĚ done by the public does not determine the allocation of delegates to particular candidates at all.¬† And the truth is that delegates are the only thing that really matters in this race.¬† In state after state, the Ron Paul campaign is focusing on the delegate selection process with laser-like precision, and it is paying off big time.¬† At this point, there is still a legitimate chance that Ron Paul will be able to win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot at the Republican national convention in Tampa.¬† If Romney does not have the 1,144 delegates that he needs on the first ballot, then it becomes a brokered convention and anything becomes possible at that point.

Sadly, most Americans have no idea how this process really works.

For example, originally we were all told that Mitt Romney won Iowa.

Then, later on we were told that a mistake was made and that Rick Santorum actually won Iowa.

Well, it turns out that Ron Paul actually won 20 out of the 28 delegates in Iowa.  That is because the process of actually selecting the delegates occurred long after the voting by the public was over.

So what happens if the Ron Paul campaign is able to produce similar results in state after state?

The Ron Paul campaign is very organized, very motivated and they understand the rules of the game.  As a recent Politico article detailed, there are huge amounts of unbound delegates out there that are still up for grabs….

There are roughly 30 states and territories where delegates aren’t bound to a particular candidate. The majority of the other states, according to a number of party officials, call for delegates to be bound for a first round of balloting but not the ensuing rounds.

‚ÄúThe dirty little secret is: At the end of the day, these guys and gals can vote any way they want,‚ÄĚ said a Republican who has attended national conventions for decades. ‚ÄúEach state has different (laws) on pledged delegates.‚ÄĚ

In many states, the ‚Äúofficial‚ÄĚ results of voting done by the public mean next to nothing.¬† The talking heads on television often tell us how many delegates are ‚Äúprojected‚ÄĚ to go to a particular candidate, but as we have seen in Iowa and in so many other states, those ‚Äúprojections‚ÄĚ are basically meaningless.

A recent Salon article discussed how the delegate selection process really works and how the Ron Paul campaign is using these rules to shake up the game….

In many caucus states, the ‚Äúofficial‚ÄĚ results that most people saw this winter were from nonbinding straw polls conducted in conjunction with precinct-level caucuses. But when it comes to choosing national convention delegates, the real action is at district caucuses and state conventions. In the past, this distinction hasn‚Äôt mattered much, but for the Paul forces ‚Äď who lack the numbers to win statewide primaries but have the devotion to pack any room, anywhere, at any time ‚Äď it has offered an inviting loophole. When turnout is small and no one is looking, the Paul folks can win, and that‚Äôs what‚Äôs been happening in a number of states.

To Paul die-hards, this will all culminate in a surprise for the ages in Tampa, with the political world suddenly realizing that Romney actually doesn’t have the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination, thereby allowing Paul to extract major concessions or even steal the nomination for himself.

So could Ron Paul really deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination?

At this point, nobody really seems to know what the real delegate count is.

Websites such as The Real 2012 Delegate Count are more accurate than most sources in the mainstream media, but even that site has been underestimating the true number of Ron Paul delegates.

Right now, Mitt Romney is not anywhere close to having the number of delegates that he needs for the nomination and Ron Paul just keeps picking up more delegates with each passing week.

For example, a Washington Post article that was posted on Sunday reported that Ron Paul just achieved a stunning delegate victory in Nevada….

Despite former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s overwhelming victory in the Nevada caucuses, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has won a majority of the state’s delegates to the party’s national convention later this year in Tampa, Florida.

Thanks to organized Paul supporters, who have been working to increase their candidate’s support at state conventions around the country, 22 of the 25 Nevada delegates up for grabs will be Paul supporters. (Another three are automatic delegates.)

That was a state that Romney supposedly ‚Äúwon‚ÄĚ.

It looks like Romney has a real problem.

In state after state, Ron Paul is gobbling up delegates.  The following are quotes from a recent Huffington Post article about what the Ron Paul campaign has been able to achieve in the past few weeks….

-‚ÄĚSure enough, Paul has already won 20 out of the 24 delegates allocated in Minnesota, by winning a majority of the congressional district contests.‚ÄĚ

-‚ÄĚIn Louisiana, Paulites ‚Äúdominated‚ÄĚ the congressional district caucuses this past Saturday, according to the New Orleans Times-Picayune. Paul‚Äôs supporters carried four of the state‚Äôs congressional districts, and are guaranteed at least 17 of 46 delegates in the Bayou State, with the potential to pick up more at the state convention on June 2.‚ÄĚ

-‚ÄĚThe other state that Benton likely has his eye on is Colorado, where the Denver Post reported in mid-April that Paul supporters and Santorum backers combined forces to win a ‚Äústunning upset‚ÄĚ at the state convention, guaranteeing that about half of the state‚Äôs 33 delegates will be for Paul in August.‚ÄĚ

And look what just happened in Maine according to USA Today….

In votes leading to the close of the two-day Maine convention, Paul supporters were elected to 21 of the 24 delegate spots from Maine to the GOP national convention in Tampa, Fla.

So Ron Paul is definitely accumulating a huge pile of his own delegates, but even many so-called ‚Äúpledged delegates‚ÄĚ for Romney could end up playing a huge role for Ron Paul.

In some states, Ron Paul supporters have been getting elected into delegate slots that are supposed to go to Romney.¬† This is highly unusual, and it could really shake things up at the national convention.¬† As a¬†Salon article¬†recently explained there will be quite a few Ron Paul supporters that will actually be going to Tampa ‚Äúdisguised‚ÄĚ as Romney delegates‚Ķ.

Besides the pledged delegates he‚Äôs won so far and the extras he‚Äôs collecting through caucuses and state conventions, Paul will also have some supporters disguised as Romney delegates. To understand how this works, just consider his campaign‚Äôs mischief in Massachusetts, where Romney won 72 percent of the primary vote ‚Äď and with it, a monopoly on the state‚Äôs pledged convention delegates. But to determine who would fill those pledged delegate slots, the state GOP held caucuses recently, and the Paul crowd came out in force, gobbling up 16 of the 19 available positions. In how many other states will this happen, or has it already happened?

But those delegates are required to vote for Romney, right?

Not so fast.

The Ron Paul campaign could actually ask those ‚Äúdisguised‚ÄĚ Romney delegates to abstain during the first round of voting in Tampa.¬† If Romney did not win on the first ballot, those delegates would then become unbound and would be able to support Ron Paul.

In fact, Ronald Reagan considered using this tactic against Gerald Ford in 1976.¬† The following is from a 1976 article entitled‚ÄúReagan Forces May ‚ÄėSteal‚Äô Ford Votes‚Ä̂Ķ.

“In secret strategy sessions, Reagan aides have toyed with the idea of asking delegates to abstain as long as their state laws require them to honor the primary verdicts.  This would prevent the President from riding up an early-ballot victory.  Then, in subsequent ballots, they could legally switch to Reagan.

Delegates have abstained from voting before.  Back in 2008, at least 14 delegates abstained from voting at the Republican national convention.

So what would happen if the Ron Paul campaign was able to get 100 or 150 ‚ÄúRomney delegates‚ÄĚ to abstain from voting during the first ballot in Tampa?

 

That is a very intriguing question.

And remember, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich also have significant numbers of delegates pledged to each of them.

So Ron Paul does not need to accumulate 1,144 delegates himself to deny Mitt Romney the nomination on the first ballot.  He just needs to keep Romney from getting to 1,144.

The race for the Republican nomination is not over.

You can find a state by state breakdown of delegate voting rules right here.

It is not too late to get involved.

If nobody gets to 1,144 on the first ballot in Tampa, it becomes a ‚Äúbrokered convention‚ÄĚ and anyone can become the nominee ‚Äď even someone that is not running right now.

So if you are not satisfied with Mitt Romney as the Republican nominee, don’t lose hope yet.

The game is still being played.

It would be a challenge, but if his supporters get energized enough, it certainly is possible that Ron Paul could still win enough delegates to deny Mitt Romney the Republican nomination on the first ballot in Tampa.

And if that happens, anything is possible."

~ http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul-could-still-win-enough-delegates-to-deny-mitt-romney-the-republican-nomination.html

 


Edited by Hands Sandon - 5/12/12 at 5:48pm
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #2 of 95

Nice use of emoji. Apparently the forum supports them in titles now. lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5‚ÄĚ iPhone exists], it doesn‚Äôt deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5‚ÄĚ iPhone exists], it doesn‚Äôt deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 95
Thread Starter 

It's going to get even uglier around here... ūüėĪ ūüė∑ ūüė∑

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #4 of 95
Here is the true count based on real delegates (not the AP fantasy land numbers)
 
ROMNEY 312 | PAUL 110 (as of this moment...read on...)
 
 
THE NOTE FROM BEN SWANN (WXIX) ABOUT THE COUNT PROCESS ON THIS SITE...
 
"Actually it is really not that complicated.  The process runs like this:  Primary or caucus in any given state and a vote is taken where voters are able to decide who their "preference" is for the nominee.  In the primary that is all show.
 
The real contest is for delegates.  They are selected through a variety of processes depending on the states.  In some states, voters cast a ballot for delegates at the polls and in other states delegates apply for the position.  Once selected, delegates [go] on to county or district caucuses.  Many times that can equate to thousands of delegates in any given state. 
 
Again, depending on the states some delegates will attend Congressional District conferences and At Large delegate conferences.  These votes are held at various times after the first primary or caucus and are culminated by the state Republican convention.  At the convention slates of delegates are postured and manuvered, it is a chance for delegates to be "elected" or chosen by other delegates in attendance.
 
At the conclusion of the state Republican convention each state will select their national delegates as well as a group of alternates.  It is only after that selection process takes place that we really know how many delegates a candidate has. 
 
Consider in contrast [how] the AP determines delegates:  When the primary or caucus is held in any given state, the AP takes the number of delegates allotted to that state and divides the total by the percentage of the vote gained by the candidate in the election.  Even though no state convention has been held, the AP projects the number of delegates who will be "required" to vote for a candidate.  If [you] have seen Reality Check recently then you know there is precedent for why delegates are not bound. 
 
The way you all are listing delegates is the most "fair" way to do so because you are not guessing and yet you will have a very clear count by the middle to end of June.
 
Hope this helps,
 
B"  Consider a donation to make the map go from demo to production.
post #5 of 95
Thread Starter 

Yep, AP's method artificially boosts Romney's delegate count. 

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #6 of 95

I've read about all of that.  The short answer is...no.  It's not going to happen.  Romney merely needs to reach 1144.  When that happens, it's over on the first ballot.  Secondly, the party is not going to allow Paul to get the nomination after Romney won so many states by popular vote.  Such an occurrence would be seen by the voters as theft...as a violation of a basic tenet of fairness.  It won't happen.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #7 of 95
So why have delegates? Why have state and national conventions? Why not do a popular vote and be done with it if the convention process will ultimately be ignored or disregarded in the end?

Ron Paul supporters are trying to work within the system and you don't like it, so you're just going to change the rules? So much for the "basic tenets of fairness".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #8 of 95
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 Romney merely needs to reach 1144.  When that happens, it's over on the first ballot.  Secondly, the party is not going to allow Paul to get the nomination after Romney won so many states by popular vote.  Such an occurrence would be seen by the voters as theft...as a violation of a basic tenet of fairness.  It won't happen.  

The way Ron Paul is winning delegates in Maine and Nevada, despite his popular vote, clearly puts a big question mark over whether Romney will reach 1144. Your position would make sense if Ron Paul was given a fair amount of airtime in the debates and through the media. He wasn't, it was grossly unfair and this seems like perfect retribution. What goes around, comes around.

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #9 of 95
Thread Starter 

Ron Paul's army of delegate winners storming Idaho to try and come away with all the delegates-

 

 

 

"Word out of Idaho is that the Ron Paul bloc in the Gem State’s GOP, perhaps encouraged by recent events at the Nevada and Maine state Republican conventions, plans to attempt a similar strategy.

 

 

According to local media, many supporters of Ron Paul in Idaho are ‚Äúso disgusted‚ÄĚ with their man‚Äôs third place finish in the Idaho caucus that they are anxiously engaged in righting that wrong.

 

 

If two-thirds of the delegates to the Idaho State Convention are Ron Paul supporters, they can vote to suspend the rules, overturn the results of the caucus and award all the national delegates to Ron Paul.

 

 

As readers may recall, Mitt Romney (the RNC‚Äôs ‚Äúpresumptive nominee‚ÄĚ) carried Idaho, winning 62 percent of the vote at caucus on March 6."

 

~ http://www.infowars.com/idaho-ron-paul-supporters-plan-to-take-control-of-state-convention/

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #10 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The way Ron Paul is winning delegates in Maine and Nevada, despite his popular vote, clearly puts a big question mark over whether Romney will reach 1144. Your position would make sense if Ron Paul was given a fair amount of airtime in the debates and through the media. He wasn't, it was grossly unfair and this seems like perfect retribution. What goes around, comes around.

 

You don't understand.  Even if Romney didn't technically reach 1144, he would be seen as the winner because he won enough popular votes in each state that he should have reached the number.  

 

As for retribution, I don't see why you'd use that term.  Romney didn't control the debates, nor did he attack Paul.  In fact, the word is that the two men have a good relationship.  Also, not even the most diehard Paul supporter believes he can actually win the nomination.  The most optimistic of them say their goal is to prevent Romney from winning...taking it past the first ballot and hoping that somehow they can get a brokered vote for another candidate.  But I'm telling you...the GOP is simply not going to allow that to happen...not now.  YOUR position would make sense if Romney wasn't on track to get enough delegates by votes.  For example, if Gingrich, Paul or Santorum all had several hundred and Romney had 800, then we might have a brokered convention.   At this point, not giving the nomination to Romney would be political suicide.  I can tell you that if the "winner" didn't win, I and many thousands of other registered Republicans would bail...for good.  People like me are generally conservative or very conservative on most issues (*most*), and are registered so they can vote in the primary in their states.  Those people would be GONE.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #11 of 95

Oh, please, please have a brokered convention.

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply
post #12 of 95

RON PAUL HE IS JOKING!

post #13 of 95
Thread Starter 

Shocking video of Romney clan ballott stuffing (I haven't watched it yet, but I'm sure it's shocking ;) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Gzhpg9fb2eo

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #14 of 95
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

You don't understand.  Even if Romney didn't technically reach 1144, he would be seen as the winner because he won enough popular votes in each state that he should have reached the number.  

 

As for retribution, I don't see why you'd use that term.  Romney didn't control the debates, nor did he attack Paul.  In fact, the word is that the two men have a good relationship.  Also, not even the most diehard Paul supporter believes he can actually win the nomination.  The most optimistic of them say their goal is to prevent Romney from winning...taking it past the first ballot and hoping that somehow they can get a brokered vote for another candidate.  But I'm telling you...the GOP is simply not going to allow that to happen...not now.  YOUR position would make sense if Romney wasn't on track to get enough delegates by votes.  For example, if Gingrich, Paul or Santorum all had several hundred and Romney had 800, then we might have a brokered convention.   At this point, not giving the nomination to Romney would be political suicide.  I can tell you that if the "winner" didn't win, I and many thousands of other registered Republicans would bail...for good.  People like me are generally conservative or very conservative on most issues (*most*), and are registered so they can vote in the primary in their states.  Those people would be GONE.  

Looks as though the antics of the Romney campaign are being exposed, but regardless, he barely spoke up at Ron Paul's few minutes in debates. I watched one debate and I was stunned. All the way through they just ignored Paul, question after question. 

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #15 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Looks as though the antics of the Romney campaign are being exposed, but regardless, he barely spoke up at Ron Paul's few minutes in debates. I watched one debate and I was stunned. All the way through they just ignored Paul, question after question. 

 

The "antics?"  I'd say the Paul campaign is the one doing "antics." As for the debates, again...not the issue.  That's the media.  I fully agree that the media ignores him.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #16 of 95

You call Ron Paul supporters working within the rules and guidelines of the established system to get delegates elected "antics"?

 

I'm curious, what do you call ballot stuffing on the part of Romney supporters?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #17 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

You call Ron Paul supporters working within the rules and guidelines of the established system to get delegates elected "antics"?

 

I'm curious, what do you call ballot stuffing on the part of Romney supporters?

 

1.  Yes.  Regardless of what the technicalities of the rules are, they are working to thwart the will of the voters.  That simply isn't right.  

 

2.   If it happened, it's obviously wrong.  But that interview is based on all hearsay and second if not third hand information.  And even if it did happen, there is no evidence it's a coordinated thing the Romney campaign is doing.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #18 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

1.  Yes.  Regardless of what the technicalities of the rules are, they are working to thwart the will of the voters.  That simply isn't right.  

 

I love it. When Person/Group A is following and using the rules in a way that Person/group B doesn't like (or didn't expect or plan for) they are mere exploiting technicalities and loopholes.

 

lol.gif

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #19 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

I love it. When Person/Group A is following and using the rules in a way that Person/group B doesn't like (or didn't expect or plan for) they are mere exploiting technicalities and loopholes.

 

lol.gif

 

You can laugh it up all you want.  I still say it's not right.  People expect that the candidate who won their votes will get the delegates, whether it's proportional or winner-take-all.  Paul got tiny percentages of the vote in several of these states, yet somehow he is getting delegates.  Crow about using the rules as they are set up all you want...you know it's not right.  And mark my words...if Romney wins enough votes at the ballot box to get to 1144 and yet somehow is denied the nomination, I and a great many other Republicans are done with the party.  Forever.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #20 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

You can laugh it up all you want.  I still say it's not right.  People expect that the candidate who won their votes will get the delegates, whether it's proportional or winner-take-all.  Paul got tiny percentages of the vote in several of these states, yet somehow he is getting delegates.  Crow about using the rules as they are set up all you want...you know it's not right.  And mark my words...if Romney wins enough votes at the ballot box to get to 1144 and yet somehow is denied the nomination, I and a great many other Republicans are done with the party.  Forever.  

 

I don't really follow intra-party machinations (primaries, delegates, super delegates, conventions, etc.) much at all. So I don't really know what all of the ins and outs and rules and loopholes and technicalities of it are.

 

I will simply say that if the Paul folks are following the rules as they are (i.e., not breaking them) then it seems a bit disingenuous to dismiss them as just skating by on technicalities and then to blame the people who didn't or don't know the rules if things didn't go the way they (possibly incorrectly) expected.

 

Furthermore, if someone didn't want the rules to work a certain way, they shouldn't have written them that way.

 

All of that said, I think the main point of the Paul campaign is to erect a platform to get a voice for his very good, well informed and wise ideas on how to turn this country around. I'm a realist...I support Paul but don't expect him to win the nomination or the presidency. But he has much to say which needs to be heard. People can simply hand wave him away and dismiss him like he's the "crazy old uncle" that everyone ignores. But I suspect those who, do so at their peril...long term.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #21 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

You can laugh it up all you want.  I still say it's not right.  People expect that the candidate who won their votes will get the delegates, whether it's proportional or winner-take-all.  Paul got tiny percentages of the vote in several of these states, yet somehow he is getting delegates.  Crow about using the rules as they are set up all you want...you know it's not right.  And mark my words...if Romney wins enough votes at the ballot box to get to 1144 and yet somehow is denied the nomination, I and a great many other Republicans are done with the party.  Forever.  

 

I don't understand how you can say that it's not right for Ron Paul supporters to work within the established guidelines and rules of the Republican Party in each state to elect delegates to the state and national conventions while turning a blind eye to the blatant fraud, deception, and lies going on within the party to ensure that Romney secures the nomination.

 

If you claim to honor that "basic tenet of fairness" at all, you should leave the party anyway. You should have left it a long time ago.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #22 of 95
Thread Starter 

Virginia is currently selecting it's delegates. Romney won the popular vote in Virginia in a two man race with Ron Paul by 60% to 40%. But already so far, Ron Paul has 15 out of the 24 delegates chosen, and he only needs 2 more of nine to secure him a majority. That majority gives him a better position in Tampa, but I don't know exactly what benefits having a majority afford him. Here's a youtube video on it- http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Nkx9FO58EwI

 

Interestingly an article from the time of the results makes out Romney would win nearly every delegate-

 

 

Because of some of the toughest candidate-filing requirements in the country, only those two candidates qualified for the ballot. Neither invested much in the state, with Romney’s victory being a foregone conclusion. But Paul won 40.5 percent of the vote, his strongest percentage showing since he joined the race.

Romney’s victory is big when it comes to the delegate count. Virginia awards its delegates on a winner-take-all basis to whoever captures a majority of the vote statewide and in each congressional district. It appeared late Tuesday that Romney would take all but one district, securing 43 of the 46 delegates available. The state’s three other delegates are its Republican National Committee members, who can vote for any candidate."

~http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/virginia-primary-results-mitt-romney-wins/2012/03/05/gIQA4yravR_story.html

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #23 of 95

Ron Paul drops out.  

 

 

So let's get the above out of the way.  Now that he's ended his campaign, screwing Romney would be seen by most as fundamentally unfair.  Now,

 

 

 

Quote:

MJ:  I don't really follow intra-party machinations (primaries, delegates, super delegates, conventions, etc.) much at all. So I don't really know what all of the ins and outs and rules and loopholes and technicalities of it are.

 

I will simply say that if the Paul folks are following the rules as they are (i.e., not breaking them) then it seems a bit disingenuous to dismiss them as just skating by on technicalities and then to blame the people who didn't or don't know the rules if things didn't go the way they (possibly incorrectly) expected.

 

Furthermore, if someone didn't want the rules to work a certain way, they shouldn't have written them that way.

 

All of that said, I think the main point of the Paul campaign is to erect a platform to get a voice for his very good, well informed and wise ideas on how to turn this country around. I'm a realist...I support Paul but don't expect him to win the nomination or the presidency. But he has much to say which needs to be heard. People can simply hand wave him away and dismiss him like he's the "crazy old uncle" that everyone ignores. But I suspect those who, do so at their peril...long term.

 

I'm not saying they are breaking the rules.  I am saying that it's fundamentally wrong to game the system to try and deny the nomination to someone who clearly got the most votes...and more importantly should have (under any basic sense of fairness) won enough delegates to win on the first ballot.  

 

Jazz:  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

I don't understand how you can say that it's not right for Ron Paul supporters to work within the established guidelines and rules of the Republican Party in each state to elect delegates to the state and national conventions while turning a blind eye to the blatant fraud, deception, and lies going on within the party to ensure that Romney secures the nomination.

 

If you claim to honor that "basic tenet of fairness" at all, you should leave the party anyway. You should have left it a long time ago.

 

OK, hold on.  What the hell are you talking about with "fraud, deception and lies?"  Who is perpetrating those?  Do you have any evidence of the the party engaging in this in widespread fashion, or just isolated cases relying on hearsay, such as in the video?  And do you really think that no Paul supporters engage in fraud, deception, etc?  

 

As for Paul supporters, the problem is as I said.  If Romney wins enough votes to get to 1,144 and doesn't get the nomination, the Paul camp is thwarting will of the voters.  That is simply wrong, no matter what the rules say.  

 

I've mentioned many times I am a registered Republican mostly because I can vote in PA's closed primaries.  Otherwise I'd be an independent of member of another party. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #24 of 95
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

The "antics?"  I'd say the Paul campaign is the one doing "antics." As for the debates, again...not the issue.  That's the media.  I fully agree that the media ignores him.  

The Ron Paul supporters are playing by the rules. I agree that it's not fair to those who voted for someone else, but then it's not really fair when Romney grabs up all, or nearly all, the delegates for coming in first place. The nomination isn't fair and you can't blame Ron Paul supporters for doing their best in a system that isn't fair in the first place. It strikes me that your just angry Ron Paul's winning far more delegates than he was, and still is, being projected to win. 

We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #25 of 95
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Ron Paul drops out.  

 

 

So let's get the above out of the way.  Now that he's ended his campaign, screwing Romney would be seen by most as fundamentally unfair.  Now,

 

 

 

 

 

He hasn't dropped out, he's just putting all his money into winning delegates. There's a big difference.

 

 

This video from just a few days ago from Paul. No way is he "dropping out".- http://www.policymic.com/articles/8250/ron-paul-winning-delegates-but-he-needs-your-help-video


Edited by Hands Sandon - 5/14/12 at 3:02pm
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #26 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

He hasn't dropped out, he's just putting all his money into winning delegates. There's a big difference.

 

 

This video from just a few days ago from Paul. No way is he "dropping out".- http://www.policymic.com/articles/8250/ron-paul-winning-delegates-but-he-needs-your-help-video

 

Yeah, that headline and then this from this morning.

 

It makes me wonder what the media is so scared about with Ron Paul. The argument that he's just the "nutty old uncle" that prattles on senselessly doesn't make much sense, because if that were the case, the best tactic would be to just show him all the time babbling on like a senile old man. That would simple demonstrate this claim clearly to everyone.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #27 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Ron Paul supporters are playing by the rules. I agree that it's not fair to those who voted for someone else, but then it's not really fair when Romney grabs up all, or nearly all, the delegates for coming in first place. The nomination isn't fair and you can't blame Ron Paul supporters for doing their best in a system that isn't fair in the first place. It strikes me that your just angry Ron Paul's winning far more delegates than he was, and still is, being projected to win. 

 

I disagree the system is unfair.  The rules on winner-take-all primaries are known well in advance.  We're talking about something different entirely.  As for me, I'm not angry per se and I certainly don't mind if Paul does better than expected.  But, he hasn't.  His getting delegates this way is nothing more than thwarting the voters' will.  

 

Look at Maine.  He lost, yet he got the most delegates.  There is no case you can make that this is fair and/or good for our Democracy.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

He hasn't dropped out, he's just putting all his money into winning delegates. There's a big difference.

 

 

This video from just a few days ago from Paul. No way is he "dropping out".- http://www.policymic.com/articles/8250/ron-paul-winning-delegates-but-he-needs-your-help-video

 

He suspended his campaign.   Even he talks about merely having "a voice" at the convention.  That's all this delegate thing is about anyway...influencing the platform. 

 

 

 

Quote:
Mr. Paul said he will continue to work to win delegates in states that have already voted and where the process of delegate-selection is playing out. He said that’s a way to make his voice heard at the Republican nominating convention in Tampa, Fla., in August.

 

All of this is moot anyway.  Romney will get to 1144 on the first ballot, and that will be the end of it.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #28 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

All of this is moot anyway.  Romney will get to 1144 on the first ballot, and that will be the end of it.  

 

Just in case.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #29 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Ron Paul drops out.  

 

 

So let's get the above out of the way.  Now that he's ended his campaign, screwing Romney would be seen by most as fundamentally unfair.  Now,

 

 

 

 

I'm not saying they are breaking the rules.  I am saying that it's fundamentally wrong to game the system to try and deny the nomination to someone who clearly got the most votes...and more importantly should have (under any basic sense of fairness) won enough delegates to win on the first ballot.  

 

Jazz:  

 

 

 

 

 

OK, hold on.  What the hell are you talking about with "fraud, deception and lies?"  Who is perpetrating those?  Do you have any evidence of the the party engaging in this in widespread fashion, or just isolated cases relying on hearsay, such as in the video?  And do you really think that no Paul supporters engage in fraud, deception, etc?  

 

As for Paul supporters, the problem is as I said.  If Romney wins enough votes to get to 1,144 and doesn't get the nomination, the Paul camp is thwarting will of the voters.  That is simply wrong, no matter what the rules say.  

 

I've mentioned many times I am a registered Republican mostly because I can vote in PA's closed primaries.  Otherwise I'd be an independent of member of another party. 

 

Ron Paul hasn't dropped out. The media is outright lying in saying he has, but he has not. He's acknowledging he does not have Wall Street funding his campaign and will not spend money he doesn't have (wouldn't it be nice to have a president who won't spend money that's not there?).

 

Working within the system is not gaming the system. The established procedures are being followed and Ron Paul delegates are being legitimately elected to state and national conventions. Changing the rules or ignoring them when others follow them and you don't like the outcome is something I expect from my 5-year-old when I play Candy Land with him. But apparently I can expect that from Romney supporters and establishment Republicans, too.

 

There are numerous, documented instances of premeditated, willful disenfranchisement of Ron Paul supporters on the part of Romney supporters and establishment Republicans. But these instances are not circulated in the mainstream media, so you must seek out alternative outlets to learn about them. I would cite some, but you would dismiss them out of hand, so I won't bother. Use your favorite search engine if you really want to know.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #30 of 95

What SDW fails to articulate is that the rules and procedures--that Ron Paul is indeed following--deny the will of the people.  This angers him because the rules and procedures defy expectations of what one, who isn't well versed in the intricate rituals of the Republican candidate selection process, would think would be involved in a primary process.  To the common voter, it feels unfair.  The common voter feels disenfranchised by Ron Paul supporters using this arcane process.

 

Jazz, are you willing to admit that you can at least understand why someone like SDW would be upset about the way Ron Paul is going about collecting delegates?  Again, Ron Paul is indeed following the rules--but can you at least empathize with the Romney supporters?

 

By the way, I really, really hope Ron Paul gets that brokered convention!

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply
post #31 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

By the way, I really, really hope Ron Paul gets that brokered convention!

 

Why is that?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #32 of 95

I want to see Obama debate someone who will push an agenda of peace.  You very well know that a debate involving Mitt Romney will include plenty of sabre rattling against Iran and North Korea.  

 

I also want to see Obama debate someone who will push for an end to the drug war.  Romney isn't even for medical marijuana.

 

 

Edit: Also, it might tear the Republican party apart.  That would be fantastic.


Edited by BR - 5/14/12 at 6:06pm

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply
post #33 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I want to see Obama debate someone who will push an agenda of peace.  You very well know that a debate involving Mitt Romney will include plenty of sabre rattling against Iran and North Korea.  

 

I also want to see Obama debate someone who will push for an end to the drug war.  Romney isn't even for medical marijuana.

 

Edit: Also, it might tear the Republican party apart.  That would be fantastic.

 

If there were Obama/Paul debates I might even watch them. They would be interesting to say the least. Agreed on the Obama/Romney debates.

 

Why would tearing the Republican party apart be fantastic in your view?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #34 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

What SDW fails to articulate is that the rules and procedures--that Ron Paul is indeed following--deny the will of the people.  This angers him because the rules and procedures defy expectations of what one, who isn't well versed in the intricate rituals of the Republican candidate selection process, would think would be involved in a primary process.  To the common voter, it feels unfair.  The common voter feels disenfranchised by Ron Paul supporters using this arcane process.

 

Jazz, are you willing to admit that you can at least understand why someone like SDW would be upset about the way Ron Paul is going about collecting delegates?  Again, Ron Paul is indeed following the rules--but can you at least empathize with the Romney supporters?

 

By the way, I really, really hope Ron Paul gets that brokered convention!

 

I can certainly understand SDW and the average voters' frustration. They have been led to believe the lie that their vote actually counts for something. Honestly, I don't think voting has changed much in the past several decades (probably longer). The march towards authoritarian government continues regardless of who is in the oval office.

 

On one hand I commend Ron Paul and his supporters for trying to work within a system that has long since been corrupted and co-opted by crony capitalists, scoundrels, and criminals. Since this system is still considered "legitimate" by the majority of the American people, it makes sense that Dr. Paul would want to try to beat the establishment at their own game, using their own system as a vehicle to grow the "R3VOLUTION".

 

On the other hand, I wish he'd run as an independent already and divorce himself from the Republican Party, which is every bit as corrupt as the Democrats. The GOP establishment will not relinquish control. Ever. They will do whatever it takes to ensure their power and interests are protected. Romney is their guy and will ensure the perpetuation of the status quo. Whatever happens at the national convention, Romney will be the nominee. And they will implode the party before allowing Ron Paul to reform it.

 

I would very much like to see Ron Paul debate Obama. Obama would not be able to teleprompt his way out of the blaring inconsistencies and abuses of power that Dr. Paul would draw attention to.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #35 of 95

Ron Paul's campaign today confirmed what we already knew....

 

Ron Paul is a dutiful Republican.

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #36 of 95

How so?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #37 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

If there were Obama/Paul debates I might even watch them. They would be interesting to say the least. Agreed on the Obama/Romney debates.

 

Why would tearing the Republican party apart be fantastic in your view?

The Republican party has completely gone off the hyperpartisan deep end.  When Republicans who attempt to cooperate and compromise with Democrats are targeted with establishment-backed primary challenges in order to get someone who will march in lockstep into office, that's a real fucking problem.  Say what you want about the Democrats, but you cannot deny that they compromise left and right (some would even argue that they compromise too much).  This queer polygamist marriage of fundamentalist Christians, Randian malcontents, and imperialist neocons has largely stayed together due to social wedge issues.  It's time for a divorce.

 

No matter what you have to say about the Affordable Care Act, you have to admit that settling for Republican healthcare reform (Bob Dole's 1994 plan and the individual mandate that almost every Republican was for before Obama got on board) while not even fighting for a public option shows an immense level of compromise and bipartisanship on the side of the Democrats.  

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply
post #38 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

What SDW fails to articulate is that the rules and procedures--that Ron Paul is indeed following--deny the will of the people.  This angers him because the rules and procedures defy expectations of what one, who isn't well versed in the intricate rituals of the Republican candidate selection process, would think would be involved in a primary process.  To the common voter, it feels unfair.  The common voter feels disenfranchised by Ron Paul supporters using this arcane process.

 

Jazz, are you willing to admit that you can at least understand why someone like SDW would be upset about the way Ron Paul is going about collecting delegates?  Again, Ron Paul is indeed following the rules--but can you at least empathize with the Romney supporters?

 

By the way, I really, really hope Ron Paul gets that brokered convention!

 

You can put your condescension where the sun doesn't shine.  Now, as for being "upset"...no.  I'm simply saying people won't stand for it out of a sense of basic unfairness of the process.  That group happens to include me, though I'm not "upset."  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

I can certainly understand SDW and the average voters' frustration. They have been led to believe the lie that their vote actually counts for something. Honestly, I don't think voting has changed much in the past several decades (probably longer). The march towards authoritarian government continues regardless of who is in the oval office.

 

On one hand I commend Ron Paul and his supporters for trying to work within a system that has long since been corrupted and co-opted by crony capitalists, scoundrels, and criminals. Since this system is still considered "legitimate" by the majority of the American people, it makes sense that Dr. Paul would want to try to beat the establishment at their own game, using their own system as a vehicle to grow the "R3VOLUTION".

 

On the other hand, I wish he'd run as an independent already and divorce himself from the Republican Party, which is every bit as corrupt as the Democrats. The GOP establishment will not relinquish control. Ever. They will do whatever it takes to ensure their power and interests are protected. Romney is their guy and will ensure the perpetuation of the status quo. Whatever happens at the national convention, Romney will be the nominee. And they will implode the party before allowing Ron Paul to reform it.

 

I would very much like to see Ron Paul debate Obama. Obama would not be able to teleprompt his way out of the blaring inconsistencies and abuses of power that Dr. Paul would draw attention to.

 

I'm really not frustrated.  I'm simply saying that people tend not to respond well to being told their votes determine the nominee, when they actually may not.  I was aware of the at least some of the intricacies we've discussed, though not all.  We've already discussed Paul running as an independent.  If he does it, Obama wins.  He knows that and it's why he's not going to do it.  He's more interested in building a movement.  

 

 

BR:
 
Originally Posted by BR View Post

 

Quote:
The Republican party has completely gone off the hyperpartisan deep end.

 

They are no more partisan than the Dems.  In fact, the House has passed many bills which the Senate refuses to even discuss.  

 

  

 

Quote:
When Republicans who attempt to cooperate and compromise with Democrats are targeted with establishment-backed primary challenges in order to get someone who will march in lockstep into office, that's a real fucking problem.

 

You're assuming that's the reason why that are "targeted" in primaries.  Tea Party voters are fed up with the endless spending and government expansion, and have simply had enough of people that support those polices.  Compromise is not the reason certain establishment candidates have lost.  

 

 

Quote:
 Say what you want about the Democrats, but you cannot deny that they compromise left and right (some would even argue that they compromise too much).  This queer polygamist marriage of fundamentalist Christians, Randian malcontents, and imperialist neocons has largely stayed together due to social wedge issues.  It's time for a divorce.

 

Neither party as a whole compromises more than another. As for the GOP, yes, it's made up of fiscal conservatives, security-minded conservatives and social conservatives.  I'm less on board with the social side, though I don't see why there can't be a "big tent."  

 

 

 

 

Quote:
No matter what you have to say about the Affordable Care Act, you have to admit that settling for Republican healthcare reform (Bob Dole's 1994 plan and the individual mandate that almost every Republican was for before Obama got on board) while not even fighting for a public option shows an immense level of compromise and bipartisanship on the side of the Democrats.  

 

Ha.  Right..what altruism!  What honor!  They didn't have the votes for a public option, so they put it through the back door.  It's hardly a Republican plan, even though Republicans did at one time favor a mandate in response to what Hillary Clinton wanted.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #39 of 95

I've posted evidence that shows as recently as a few years ago Republicans favored an individual mandate.  You have seen this evidence MANY TIMES.  Yet, you still refuse to admit Republicans recently favored an individual mandate.  This is what makes you a bad citizen--you don't make decisions based on evidence.

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply

 

‚ÄúThe nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.‚Ä̬†
-Sagan
Reply
post #40 of 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

The Republican party has completely gone off the hyperpartisan deep end.  When Republicans who attempt to cooperate and compromise with Democrats are targeted with establishment-backed primary challenges in order to get someone who will march in lockstep into office, that's a real fucking problem.  Say what you want about the Democrats, but you cannot deny that they compromise left and right (some would even argue that they compromise too much).  This queer polygamist marriage of fundamentalist Christians, Randian malcontents, and imperialist neocons has largely stayed together due to social wedge issues.  It's time for a divorce.

 

No matter what you have to say about the Affordable Care Act, you have to admit that settling for Republican healthcare reform (Bob Dole's 1994 plan and the individual mandate that almost every Republican was for before Obama got on board) while not even fighting for a public option shows an immense level of compromise and bipartisanship on the side of the Democrats.  

Well said, BR. Very well said.  I nearly divorced myself from Obama and the Democratic Party over their ass kissing for Olympia Snow's vote (who ultimately betrayed them anyway).  This was always the Dole/Romney health care plan until it suddenly became "death panels" and "socialism" and "crammed down our throats" and the other cabal of lies thrown around.  Remember when Republicans felt the individual mandate was part of the whole "personal responsibility" meme until it suddenly became "unconstitutional"?   I do.  You do.  They don't (or they pretend they don't).

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Republican Party Nominee... ūüĎÄ ...Ron Paul?