Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Michigan and Arizona primary thread.

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Again , I would like to say to those who refuse to accept the truth.
The rules of the Republican party state, "Any state that is a winner take all, that holds it's primary before April 1,
WILL NOT BE A WINNER TAKE ALL DELEGATES !" Which means all candidates get a share of their vote percentage of delegates
Stop believing the MSM !




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


I've often wondered...how many college students receiving financial out there are supporting Ron Paul. Since in Ron Paul's world, they most likely wouldn't be able to go to college.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Again , I would like to say to those who refuse to accept the truth.
The rules of the Republican party state, "Any state that is a winner take all, that holds it's primary before April 1,
WILL NOT BE A WINNER TAKE ALL DELEGATES !" Which means all candidates get a share of their vote percentage of delegates
Stop believing the MSM !


No it doesn't...it means that the national rules are a guideline and not a hard fact. And the national rules don't set any guidelines on how a state should run a proportional race...nothing says you take the candidates percentage and divide the delegates...each state does it differently.

Florida is standing by their "winner take all" status and so is Arizona. The national GOP only has one way to enforce the rule and that is to tell them that their delegates won't count...and they aren't going to do that...not with two important states like Florida and Arizona.

Michigan is technically "proportional"...but it really isn't. It is winner take all by congressional district...I think they have 15 districts, 2 delegates a district. So a candidate can come in last and still win 2 delegates, while the third place person recieved more statewide votes than they did but didn't secure a district. I saw one article that stated that there are 15 mini primaries in Michigan tonight...and that is a good way to think about it.


At the end of the day, the GOP will decide what to do with the Florida and Arizona based on what is in the parties best interest. If leaving them as winner take all secures Romney the nomination....they are going to stay as winner take all.
edit on 28-2-2012 by OutKast Searcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Remember, Clinton's Stephanopolis brought up "contraception" thinking it would take down Republican candidates, especially one. He doesn't dare speak of BHO's record. And now liberals ask why is it all about "social issues" when there are more important things to vet? Speaking out of two sides of their mouths.

Today's headline, a distort: Santorum Argues for Religion in Government

Santorum was two years old when Kennedy spoke of separation of Church and State, at the time people feared Catholicism. It isn't "separation of Church and State", the founding father's desire was freedom of religion not the elimination of faith.

The lying headline, for the truth, this is what Santorum believes:

February 26, 2012

Santorum also addressed the issue of religion and the role it should play in government during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press" today.

Deeply held convictions should be part of the “public square,” Santorum said.

“The idea that people of faith should not be permitted in the public square to influence public policy is antithetical to the First Amendment,” he said. “This idea that we need to segregate faith is a dangerous idea, and we’re seeing the Obama administration not only segregating faith but imposing the states’ values, now, on churches, which is even a bigger affront to the First Amendment.”...

www.newsmax.com...



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by MrSpad
 


I've often wondered...how many college students receiving financial out there are supporting Ron Paul. Since in Ron Paul's world, they most likely wouldn't be able to go to college.


Or that the guy wants to sell our national parks and shut down the Department of the Interior. Maybe Disney would buy Yellow Stone and make it into an amusement park. But, you can not expect most college kids to bother looking to much into politics they do not even bother to vote.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 





But, you can not expect most college kids to bother looking to much into politics they do not even bother to vote.


Well that's what i find strange, supposedly Ron Paul is a huge hit on college campuses. I find it hard to believe that most of them aren't on some kind of financial aid, grant, or loan.




Or that the guy wants to sell our national parks and shut down the Department of the Interior. Maybe Disney would buy Yellow Stone and make it into an amusement park.


And not only that, Ron Paul would put free trade on steroids, making it even more difficult to compete with slave labor.

Just because the guy wants to minimize government does not mean it's good for the country. It seems people get too caught up in the "liberty" rhetoric.

Paul is nearly as extreme as Santorum...just in a different way.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
Paul is nearly as extreme as Santorum...just in a different way.

Ya, because the way it is going now is working so good.


Sticking your head in the sand David, just gets your hair dirty.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


why are you even on this site, then????????????.....santorum or romney??????????????omg



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by David9176
Paul is nearly as extreme as Santorum...just in a different way.

Ya, because the way it is going now is working so good.


Sticking your head in the sand David, just gets your hair dirty.


Change just for the sake of change is not a good thing. The change needs to be one of good ideas. Not ones that will make things even worse. Not that I think the guy could deliver on any of his ideas.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by doryinaz
 


Just stopped by to see how the thread was going and I must admit to confusion. Why would you want to kick jjf3rd77 off the site? I thought you'd appreciate discussion from different points of view. Would you please explain the point you're making? It does seem that Gingrich and Paul are not getting anywhere near enough votes to be considered the favorite of Republican voters. Maybe it's time to explore alternatives.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 04:00 PM
link   
The media, so many coming against Santorum.

When is anyone going to understand, you can't go against God and think there is going to be any grace coming down from Heaven.

Look at the state of our country. Teenagers go to school and murder.

How can God enlighten Obama, a man who is totally against Him or men who make exceptions to life? #1 reason for God's just judgment soon but can be mitigated...

We need a President who is for life.

Can't you see the demographics, 50 years contraception, and almost 40 years of abortion and now the "abortion pill" there is hardly any next generation.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad
Change just for the sake of change is not a good thing. The change needs to be one of good ideas. Not ones that will make things even worse. Not that I think the guy could deliver on any of his ideas.

Politicans, like Paul, have to have ideas, plans for every aspect of the American economy, foreign and domestic policy.
Will he be able to implement all of his policies, of course not.
He has to slow this path America is on, and change its direction to something that can bring about positive change.
He may implement 2 or 3 of his policies at best, in the first term.
From Paul, all I can hope for is for him to steer America into a new direction, and others following him, to continue it.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The Michigan polls are still open to vote for at least another 3 hours. Most people are just now at 5:30p.m. getting off work and will most likely be stopping to vote on their way home. Regardless of what other people have posted the votes have not been counted totally yet and its a little premature to assume anything yet. Also this vote is nothing more than a straw poll as NONE of the delegates have been awarded yet and will not be finalized until the convention. I find it amusing how many people claim Romney and Santorum owned this and that. All you have to do is observe the videos of the people who attended the huge Ron Paul rally at MSU vs the very small crowd of people who came to see Romney at Ford Field.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Outkast that is a very good breakdown of what will happen. This is reality not the wishful thinking of the DailyPaul. However, I am sure you are prepared to get bashed by He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named Supporters. He spreads the most rhetoric and leftist ideals than all the other candidates. He doesn't have 'real' solutions. He has some large idealistic ones that frankly will never pass congress. Oh, wait He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named will 'fix' that too. If anything he'll make it more corrupt because he wants to put in members he feels will be good for the country. Another similarity to Obama. But in light of repeating myself over and over again I'll stop highlighting many of his errors and just let you all drink his kool-aid! ?


I expect we may all get bashed for real by the media elite's chosen prez before any Paul supporter ever took (or wanted) a shot at you. And I'm sure the new-suit-same-as-the-old-suit will "fix" whatever ails you, too, since you'll love being governed by any one of the gung ho chicken hawks for whom killing sounds like a video game. Just think, the new/old suit will have NDAA painting a large target on everyone's back and no one will stop them from choosing you, just like you chose them. With your eyes closed.

So like children, the good old boys are now fighting over who gets to play with the joy stick. Funny thing, but if they really were your children, you'd probably send them to their room without the joy stick just for being such arrogant little @$#@s..



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Again , I would like to say to those who refuse to accept the truth.
The rules of the Republican party state, "Any state that is a winner take all, that holds it's primary before April 1,
WILL NOT BE A WINNER TAKE ALL DELEGATES !" Which means all candidates get a share of their vote percentage of delegates


Actually, no. If it's a "winner take all" and they reduce the number of delegates, the winner still gets ALL the delegates. He just gets half as many as the state normally gets. The runners up get nada.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The republican national election committee made the rules and were applied in the 2008 convention Florida was given half of their delegates for voting early in 2008.
The party made the rules not me .
And any state that hold it's pimary before April 1 is not a winner take all regardless of what the state says or MSM says.
Every state had committee members vote on the rules and Florida's members agreed to the rules.

Read the whole article
on page 2
the article says
Because all states voting before April 1 must award delegates proportionately, it will be harder for a single candidate to quickly amass the delegates needed to lock up the nomination.
www.sunshinestatenews.com...
edit on 28-2-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-2-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-2-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-2-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Today's headline, a distort: Santorum Argues for Religion in Government

the founding father's desire was freedom of religion not the elimination of faith.

“The idea that people of faith should not be permitted in the public square to influence public policy is antithetical to the First Amendment,” he said. “This idea that we need to segregate faith is a dangerous idea, and we’re seeing the Obama administration not only segregating faith but imposing the states’ values, now, on churches, which is even a bigger affront to the First Amendment.”... Rick Santorum.


This is why Rick Santorum is surging in the polls.The man is a religious genius. Take that as you will. He is pretty high up in the Knights of Columbus. He may be portrayed as a religious nut job in the media, but he goes out to people. He touches them, and asks them what they are feeling and how they handle it. Most of the religious right handles hard times by turning to their faith. Which the left loathes!

You always see Santorum around a big bunch of followers, and he is either deep in prayer or talking PASSIONATELY about social topics, which the left also hates! Unless if they generalize and deem it worthy enough to talk about. So I would say that just as there are passionate He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named followers there are twice as many Santorum supporters just as passionate about their own topics.

Romney's big ticket was his economic plan, which Santorum's is actually a bit better. It's neck and neck for Santorum and Romney now, and if Santorum pulls ahead here. I don't think much will stop him. Romney supporters on the other hand always look like they are fake/paid to be there.
edit on 28-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-2-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Call him the thinking man's choice.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


He will show so poorly amongst Dems, Indies, and Libertarian though, that he will have no chance.

You can't come out against contraceptives and expect to win, and you can't say that woman who become pregnant due to rape shouldn't be allowed abortions. Ironic that his wife had an abortion before she married him, I wonder how he lives "knowing" he will go to heaven and his wife to hell. I mean that's what he believes right?

He is a nut job for sure.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by doryinaz
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


why are you even on this site, then????????????.....santorum or romney??????????????omg


What are you saying? I have to watch He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named like a hawk? Trust me, I get enough of his garbage on this site, and contrary to popular belief I do not comment on all of the threads about him. Just stupid sensational ones. I try to steer people away from his campaign rhetoric because I see clear similarities between this campaign and Obama's.

Anyway, I was talking about the front runners. He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named is going to come in third and fourth place tonight. Depending on the state. I will be right and you will cry conspiracy. The media has done a pretty good job at projecting who wins. Because they're data is based on facts. There is no proof of your media/polling conspiracy besides for Maine and Romney still won!





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join