Ron Paul 2nd in total delegates currently?

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Wait so these are the delegates the Paul Campaign feels he should win? They are passing it off as facts? It's wishful thinking, which the Paul Campaign does a lot of I have seen. That's like the Romney campaign saying he won the election a month ago before Santorum Surged haha. Funny.




posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 



It would be ignorant to call people names for having their own opinion, that's why we all have separate minds. If you may, what don't you agree with?



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


No, the way I understand it is these are actual pleged Ron Paul STATE delegates. Some delegate spots have not been voted for yet because they start at the county level then go up the chain to the state level, then the convention level etc.

At the caucuses however, state delegates are voted for immediately following the straw poll, then county, then congressional etc..It's a TAD confusing BUT, although it's impossible to know all the numbers (they ALL haven't been counted/voted on yet, in some cases won't be for months), there's no reason to believe the numbers posted by the Paul campaign aren't correct so far.
edit on 21-2-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


It's just more propaganda. Why post something before something is finalized? It's almost worse than Fraud. You don't see the other candidates doing this. If the numbers don't turn out exactly the way the campaign thinks it will, you will yell fraud and conspiracy.
edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Wookiep
 


It's just more propaganda. Why post something before something is finalized? It's almost worse than Fraud. You don't see the other candidates doing this. If the numbers don't turn out exactly the way the campaign thinks it will, you will yell fraud and conspiracy.
edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)


I think the reason they are posting it now would be because of the real propaganda that the media is showing everyone. The numbers make more sense than you may be willing to believe. Paul has a lot of delegates, even Rachel Maddow did a special on it, and it's quite factual. Most of the media either do not understand the delegate process or they are deliberately giving bad info.
edit on 21-2-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


I don't know much about the delegates either, but maybe they are waiting until you know the actual delegate count concludes and then they will release their true facts. Not some polls to make a last place candidate feel good.

As mentioned before the DailyPaul is just as if not more bias than the MSM.
edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


The media has already been showing false delegate counts. They come up with figures before the caucus straw poll results are even released. While I understand your contempt for "The Daily Paul" the article is directly scourced from the Paul campaign. (as indicated in the article)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


Keep preaching the truth my friend. I would give you 2 stars if I could.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


I posted that video with Rachael you are talking about on the first page, in my first post. They seem threatened by his delegate approach.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


How is the Paul Campaign any less bias than dailypaul? They are both working for the man.

It's like saying, Romney can't use his own money to fund his campaign but he can use his super pac.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:36 PM
link   
S&F to ya, great thread.

I've been giving this a lot of thought and I've come to the conclusion that Dr. Paul has to pull off a landslide pretty much both ways- both at the convention and then as the presidential candidate. Here's why I believe what I believe.

He has to be able to choose his own running mate and he can't do that without smoking the other candidates going into the convention. If he gets the nomination but has to wheel and deal to get it he'll get stuck with one of the other three as his VP for a running mate. If that happens he won't live to see the sixth month in office. Yes, I'm convinced they will pull out the stops and gun him down if it takes fifty shooters in front of a hundred judges.

He made a well planned slip this past weekend and told a reporter that he'd like to have Naplitano as his running mate (wow what a team! I get goose bumps thinking about what sixteen years of those two could do for the country). The judge is the only guy besides Ventura that would scare the oligarchs worse than Dr. Paul and that would keep him alive.

He also has to win with a landslide against Obama. It's what I call the fear factor. If it's close the electronic voting machines will call the election and Obama wins. But if it's a landslide they dare not. There would be a nation wide revolt within days of announcing the winner.

Then there's the Congress. With a landslide he goes to Washington with a mandate and Congress dare not start playing games. Assuming (laughably) that there's no vote fraud and he won by a small margin Congress would make sure he couldn't pass gas let alone any legislation. They'd feel like they had enough public support to stonewall him until they could find some nonsense to impeach him with.

This is the first time since the country's founding that the Congress must literally fear the people. And I mean fear for their lives. Unless they're more afraid of being lynched than of losing AIPAC money they'll just play games and accuse Paul of not working with them.

This is also the first time in our history we'll have to live with the results of our vote. This won't be one of those deals where future generations will have to deal with the fallout, it will be us. If anyone but Paul wins we'll be at war with Iran by March of next year. And it will be a sure bet and it won't be like our military victories in Grenada and Panama. This time we'll get our asses kicked good.

The economy is toast no matter who wins. The only difference with who's in the White House will be whether or not we end up in a military dictatorship. Dr. Paul won't allow the military to be used against us. Obama's already planning it.

Sageofmonticello, I hope you're right. In fact, I hope that you've understated how well Dr. Paul is doing. There's more at stake here than most of us realize. This country's hanging by a thread.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


If they were waiting than why have they already released their estimated delegate counts? Why does every MSM outlet have a different count?

and finally jjf3rd77, now that you are on my thread, perhaps you would like to take the time and give us all an actual explanation why you are so militantly against Ron Paul and discount everything anyone says about him.

Also, these are not results from a Ron Paul fan site, they are results given from the Ron Paul campaign relayed on a Ron Paul fan site. This has already been explained. You may have a point about bias but that has been addressed.

With the stories coming from people who have actually become Ron Paul delegates they do seem factual and honestly, if Ron Paul was going to lie about it, I think he would say he was doing better.

Anyhow I await your biased, self contradicting and insulting response. Should be good for a laugh.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   

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.


And like I said to you once before.....

If you took the time to actually look at Obama's Senate voting record, you would have known some of the same things you already know now after having watched him in action for the last 3 years. If you had done that, you would have seen what Obama supported and had an idea of what he would do as President. If you had done that, you would have seen how many votes on issues Obama didnt bother to show up for, and that too would have given you an idea of how Obama operates.

But you didn't do that an instead you believed the hype created by the MSM. However, the MSM does not hype Paul. They call him crazy. They say he can't win. They call him unelectable. They spin everything he does and says. They cut him off and set him up and omit him from reports. The only "hype" you hear about Paul comes from his Supporters and that is a HUGE difference when comparing the "hype" from today to 2008 when you we fell for the MSM spin and BS. Which is the same mistake you do today when the MSM tells you Paul is crazy and bad and any other Candidate is better.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Wookiep
 


How is the Paul Campaign any less bias than dailypaul? They are both working for the man.

It's like saying, Romney can't use his own money to fund his campaign but he can use his super pac.


Well I guess that's up for debate, if you're into (Ron Paul) conspiracy theories etc.
edit on 21-2-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by CmdrZero
 


Wow, i feel like you jumped into my brain and wrote down all that you saw. This is almost word for word something I was talking to my brother about the other day. some very good points you make in your post.

I love the idea of the judge as the VP for exactly the reason you stated, it is the best life insurance policy Ron Paul could have. Also I would love to see the judge debate Biden. That would be hilarious.

The landslide win is the big thing. Voter machine fraud is simply the reality.

CmdrZero, I hope I am right too. At the least I am much more encouraged than i was a few days ago.

"Denying a peaceful revolution will only ensure a violent revolution." JFK



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Wookiep
 


I don't know much about the delegates either, but maybe they are waiting until you know the actual delegate count concludes and then they will release their true facts. Not some polls to make a last place candidate feel good.

As mentioned before the DailyPaul is just as if not more bias than the MSM.
edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)


Actually there is a very big difference in having a delegate count being released by the MSM and being released by the Paul campaign. I am inclined to believe these numbers and this is why.....

The MSM releases numbers and calls them "projections". This is a legal term. It means the numbers they are releasing is a guess. If they reported these numbers and called it the actual delegate count and not a projection, they could be found guilty in a court of law for any number of charges for reporting false information as fact. These is TONS of case law on this issue. So by reporting the delegate count as a "projection" the network can legally say anything it wants at all. It does not have to be true because they admit it may not be accurate by calling it a "projection".

Now the same would also hold true for the Paul Campaign. By releasing these numbers, any other Candidate can sue them and this could even possibly result in criminal charges as well. The Paul campaign will have to show evidence that this is, by their records, an accurate delegate count.

If you want to know how true this report is, just watch what happens. If there are no fast immediate legal actions taken against the Paul Campaign, then you will know it is a truthful count.
edit on 21-2-2012 by MrWendal because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Wookiep
 


So I can't question He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named? It's insulting to you that I am not his supporter? Why is this? Every supporter has asked me this question. Why can't I just question him outright? Why do I need to explain all of my political views to every single person who asks me this question after I attack He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named? He is not a God nor a dictator. I have every right to question this bias on his website and campaign. I don't have to explain myself to you or anybody. I do not need to jump on this train nor anyone's train. I don't even think the Republicans are going to win this year, sadly.

I question the MSM too, but those numbers are more aligned with each other's than DailyPaul. Seems to me like they (Paul campaign) are the ones lying.

However, let's just say, the people I want in the White House are not in the race or have already dropped out.

edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by CmdrZero
 



May I just add that Paul only mentioned the Judge as VP but did not name him, that video was taken out of context. That was recorded in september. The video below in the first min is in full context.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wookiep


Well I guess that's up for debate, if you're into (Ron Paul) conspiracy theories etc.
edit on 21-2-2012 by Wookiep because: (no reason given)


So, the DailyPaul and the Paul Campaign are not working for him? I don't understand how there can be a conspiracy theory there...
edit on 21-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Wookiep
 


So I can't question He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named? It's insulting to you that I am not his supporter? Why is this? Every supporter has asked me this question. Why can't I just question him outright? Why do I need to explain all of my political views to every single person who asks me this question after I attack He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named? He is not a God nor a dictator. I have every right to question this bias on his website and campaign. I don't have to explain myself to you or anybody. I do not need to jump on this train nor anyone's train. I don't even think the Republicans are going to win this year, sadly.

I question the MSM too, but those numbers are more aligned with each other's than DailyPaul. Seems to me like they are the ones lying.

However, let's just say, the people I want in the White House are not in the race or have already dropped out.



I do not think anyone is saying you can not question any possible bias. Read the post above yours, I explain the difference for you.





new topics
top topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join