Ron Paul 2nd in total delegates currently?

Almost everyone should know by now that Ron Paul's strategy for nomination is focused on picking up delegates. In the news all you hear about is the surge of Santorum and that Ron Paul is all but out of the race.

If that is reality or not remains to be seen though we all know how the MSM likes to distort facts in order to serve us the news as they see fit. We also all know that campaigns sometimes do the same in order to shine a better light on their candidate.

With that in mind, I came across this posted at the dailypaul today

The real delegate count Roney 93, Paul 82

Every media outlet seems to have a different delegate count. But almost invariably we're told Ron Paul is in last place and far behind the leader Mitt Romney. But none of these delegate counters properly estimate how the caucuses will allocate their delegates. According to the Paul campaign, Ron is well positioned to win 50% of the delegates in Iowa, 75% in Minnesota, 50% in Colorado, and 75% in Maine. So what is likely to be the true delegate count once the caucus states select their national delegates? Add together the bound delegates from New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, and Nevada, and extrapolate the caucus states' delegates using the Paul campaign's estimates and you get:

Total Delegates (IA, NH, SC, FL, NV, MN, CO, ME)
Romney: 93 (6, 7, 2, 50, 14, 2, 7, 5)
Paul: 82 (13, 3, 0, 0, 5, 28, 17, 16)
Gingrich: 29 (0, 0, 23, 0, 6, 0, 0, 0)
Santorum: 25 (6, 0, 0, 0, 3, 7, 9, 0)
Unpledged: 14 (3, 2, 0, 0, 0, 3, 3, 3)

If the Ron Paul campaign is correct, this is an encouraging sign. If they are incorrect they have really painted themselves into a corner. I tend to believe the Ron Paul camp on this one. They would really be spinning quite a yarn if not true. One thing about Ron Paul, he does appear to be very honest.

If you are wondering why Missouri is not included I think it has to do with the fact that they will not begin their delegate selection process until March.

If these numbers are to be believed it seems pretty clear that this is a two man race between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. There is still a very long way to go but with Romney losing momentum I don't think it is unrealistic anymore that Ron Paul can actually win the republican nomination outright.

If Ron Paul's campaign is right or not, it is obvious that the MSM is just spouting complete lies about how delegates are awarded and that we are a very long way from calling anybody the eventual nominee.

I hope this puts a little wind in the sails of Ron Paul supporters and perhaps quells the defeatist attitude I have seen many of them take up in the last few weeks. Lets not forget, the MSM lies through their teeth everyday. He can win and he is doing quite well with what counts, delegates.

reply to post by sageofmonticello


First of all, the source you quoted is bound to be just as biased as the MSM outlets. It is the DailyPaul after all.

Second of all, who should people believe in this case? A Ron Paul fan site or the MSM? Most sheeple would believe the latter and they'll vote accordingly.

reply to post by The Sword


First of all, I already addressed that in my OP.

Second of all the information is linked to a Ron Paul Fan site but comes directly from the Ron Paul campaign, also I addressed that in my OP as well.

Do you have anything to add in your response that I did not already talk about?

Seriously, both of your points I already addressed.

reply to post by sageofmonticello


Actually, no.

The problem is, without the MSM, how is Paul going to reach a wider audience than the internet demographic that supports him?

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by sageofmonticello

 

Actually, no.

The problem is, without the MSM, how is Paul going to reach a wider audience than the internet demographic that supports him?

That remains to be seen I guess. He seems to be doing OK without them right now. Maybe the MSM isn't as influential as you and I think. I have actually been surprised lately when talking to people just how much they realize the MSM is full of beans. Many are waking up to that fact I have noticed. Many people have expressed those sentiments to me, in my personal non-internet life, then I would of ever expected.

I have no reason to believe the Paul campaign would be lying about it. I think it's totally plausable. In my state for example (Colorado) Paul got fourth on the straw poll. I knew the next day however, that he won tons of delegates and probably got 1st in that regard. The MSM will keep reporting it the way they do in hopes that Ron Paul will drop out, but that won't happen.

reply to post by sageofmonticello


I just hope they wake up in time to stop Santorum from cruising anywhere.

Just itching to see an Obama-Paul debate. That would be a thing for the ages.

reply to post by The Sword


I would pay to see that. That would be an absolutely epic debate. If these results are to be believed it would appear Santorum has a problem picking up delegates so no worries about him I think. His beauty contests results don't appear to be winning him many delegates.

reply to post by sageofmonticello


Nice post, synchronicity...I just checked this out today and I never go on the dailypaul. I really want Paul to win for so many reasons and someone told me today he basically has no chance.... regardless I remember watching this video and knowing that the delegates are all that matter. So I just checked out the delegates to see how we are doing today. This video might be helpful to understanding delegates. This is MSM talking about his too, however like always they have to apply some sort of negativity to Paul.... I cant stand this woman, she asks if getting delegates is cheating. I hope this is helpful to everyone.

www.youtube.com...

You most likely will get different delegate counts depending on where you look.

According to the WSJ, the delegates are as follows:

Romney 123
Santorum 72
Gingrich 32
Paul 19

WSJ

Projecting the delegates from here on out is a risky proposition, one can hope for that outcome of Paul taking those percentages, but what is the reality of it? One news story could blow it all up. The GOP is certainly in a time of uncertainty right now, I guess all we have to d is wait it out.

reply to post by sageofmonticello


I'd say so.

It's because Ron Paul would have to live up to the hype. I think people could make a better decision with such a match-up.

Originally posted by Wookiep
I have no reason to believe the Paul campaign would be lying about it. I think it's totally plausable. In my state for example (Colorado) Paul got fourth on the straw poll. I knew the next day however, that he won tons of delegates and probably got 1st in that regard. The MSM will keep reporting it the way they do in hopes that Ron Paul will drop out, but that won't happen.

Yea, those are pretty much my feelings on it as well. Everything I have read from people that have attended and been a part of the delegate process say the same. I think it is only a matter of time before Paul starts winning the beauty contests as well but at least his delegate count is basically tied for first right now and growing with each caucus.

Very encouraging news.

Missouri had their primary, but their county caucuses are going to be on March 17, 2012.
Santorum won the beauty contest here, but no delegates so far.

reply to post by The Sword

It's because Ron Paul would have to live up to the hype.

I don't understand what you mean. Could you elaborate on that a bit if you have the time?

reply to post by sageofmonticello


I see him referred as the Thomas Jefferson of our time. He's called the "Peace President" by some. He's often hailed as the "only man that can save this country".

If you'll remember, in 2008, there was similar hype surrounding Obama.

reply to post by The Sword


Oh, OK, I gotcha. Yea, I have seen that said as well. I think he can deliver though I would admit Obama is a much better speaker or maybe just a better prepared speaker. Speaks to the crowd more. Ron Paul seems to wing it a bit which is one of the things I like about him, he doesn't just spout out some prepared and tested answer, he says what he thinks. A pretty rare thing in politics these days.

I think Ron Paul could deliver because I think he can directly challenge some of the campaign promises Obama put out there in 2008 that he hasn't delivered on. Make no mistake though, it would be an uphill battle for Paul and he would have a lot going against him. In a two person debate though, he would have the time necessary to explain himself fully.

It would certainly be very entertaining, for whatever reason for any sides supporters.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by sageofmonticello

 

I see him referred as the Thomas Jefferson of our time. He's called the "Peace President" by some. He's often hailed as the "only man that can save this country".

If you'll remember, in 2008, there was similar hype surrounding Obama.

I do remember that kind of Obama hype in 08 and admittedly it made me sick as well. I'll agree that there are some fanatics, but that can't be avoided anywhere. I think a LOT of the passion for Ron Paul genuinely comes from the unfair treatment the media/GOP gives him. I agree with most (if not all) of his policies, as they are vastly different from any other candidate and his track record as well, but with that said.. I would probably be less vocal if I felt this process was fair so far. This last year has been the most frustrating year I've ever seen when it comes to the media and their practices, so I tend to put my voice out against it. I think I speak for a lot of others as well.

It's kind of a blessing in disguise for Ron Paul because the media is actually only helping him in many ways. It's kind of an un-intentional reverse psychology.

reply to post by The Sword



Everyone must be discerning about any president in the current unconstitutional system we live in. Once the corporation of the united states is eliminated and we go back onto common law, it will be hard to trust any president for sure, I understand where your comming from.

However, we knew nothing about Obama, we knew Bush was the devil and everyone was hyped up over change and the symbolism of having an African American president given our past with slavery. We didnt know about his history of voting, Paul consistently votes for the constitution and I would say we all should respect that. Ron is the only person offering real change but the question is...can he pull it off if he gets elected? I understand and respect your discernment though.

reply to post by rootzgemini


Better than calling me a troll or a shill.

I still respectively disagree but it's all good.

Ron Paul supporters are educated about how the election process works. It's all about the delegates. They have been waiting since 2008 and are ready to go!