Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Romney to reach 1,144 Delegates in Texas:

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monsatan
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Yeah, kinda like Romney lost his home state to Paul?


No he didn't, Romney won his own Massachusetts by a landslide:
en.wikipedia.org...

72% of the popular vote.




posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I am using the real numbers. You are using the magic "projected" numbers the media awards based on what they think the outcome will be.

I am using the numbers that are the actual verified delegates that are real existing people. there haven't even been enough state conventions for the delegate numbers you have to exist yet. Do you not understand that you don't vote for the delegates at the primary when people go to vote?

The delegates are chose at the state conventions. That is why Paul has been gaining so many delegates and winning states that he didn't win on election day. How hard is it to understand?

Look at the dates for the state conventions. Also look and see the number of delegates that haven't been allocated in states where the delegates are chosen. Those left over delegates are selected at the national convention. Why do you insist on coming on here and posting about things you are completely ignorant of?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
edit on 25-5-2012 by knows_but_doesnt because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-5-2012 by knows_but_doesnt because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


W-w-w-wrooong.

Paul won Mass in the end guy.

You guys really don't understand this.
Source



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I am using the real numbers. You are using the magic "projected" numbers the media awards based on what they think the outcome will be.

I am using the numbers that are the actual verified delegates that are real existing people. there haven't even been enough state conventions for the delegate numbers you have to exist yet. Do you not understand that you don't vote for the delegates at the primary when people go to vote?

The delegates are chose at the state conventions. That is why Paul has been gaining so many delegates and winning states that he didn't win on election day. How hard is it to understand?

Look at the dates for the state conventions. Also look and see the number of delegates that haven't been allocated in states where the delegates are chosen. Those left over delegates are selected at the national convention. Why do you insist on coming on here and posting about things you are completely ignorant of?


If you can't show me an official link of any kind than you are talking air. Please show me one little link that talks about your numbers. Unless they are not your made up numbers....



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by knows_but_doesnt
edit on 25-5-2012 by knows_but_doesnt because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-5-2012 by knows_but_doesnt because: (no reason given)


I have good standing from others on here that that map has been debunked.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
I really have to say I love watching you guys make clowns of yourselves. Do like one second of searching in google.

Paul has been winning states like mad in the past few weeks.
I am not saying he is going to take it all, but he is absolutely still in the race and there is far, SO FAR, from a clear nominee. Texas will secure nothing for Romney.

I mean you OP you don't have to like Paul, but you don't have to lie to make yourself feel better about things.
Get your nose out of the infotainment and you might learn something. You are dead wrong about the delegate count. I am talking real numbers you are talking imaginery ones. I can back mine up, you can't. You know there that those delegates have to be people right? Too bad the ones the news are reporting for Romney don't exist.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


W-w-w-wrooong.

Paul won Mass in the end guy.

You guys really don't understand this.
Source


No, just no.



Romney won the Massachusetts Republican primary with 72 percent of the vote, so 38 of the state's 41 RNC delegates are legally bound to vote for their former governor on the first ballot at the convention.


Read more: articles.businessinsider.com...



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Others on here..
LOL.
No it absolutely hasn't been debunked. You can research it yourself. If you didn't do lazy work on your threads and were out to post info rather than troll maybe you would get some flags on your threads.

All you have to do is look for a list of states that have held their state conventions. Any that haven't have not awarded delegates yet. You are posting the numbers that the news THINKS the candidates will have, but Paul has shown that his people are working to make the media's numbers wrong.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


No man.. YOU ARE WRONG.

I am sorry, you haven't been paying a damn bit of attention. The delegates aren't bound to percentages like the media has been saying. This has been proven multiple times.

Ron Paul has the majority of the delegates, what part of the percentage doesn't matter, do you not understand? Learn something.

They don't have to vote for Romney in the first round, BUT they just can't vote for anyone else. All they have to do is abstain from voting in the first and move to the second. That is what they are doing. You guys really need to pay attention.
edit on 25-5-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Gogo: All I am hearing from you is that I am wrong and I should research. I have found that one blog with only those numbers. No one else is saying that that blog is official! I consider that research enough!

So until you post a real link about how you magically came to those numbers please stop questioning the numbers and leave the thread, since you obviously cannot back up your silly little claims. Where are you getting your magic numbers? These can be found here on Google: www.google.com...
edit on 25-5-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 



Gogo: All I am hearing from you is that I am wrong and I should research. I have found that one blog with only those numbers. No one else is saying that that blog is official!


That blog is official!!



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 



Gogo: All I am hearing from you is that I am wrong and I should research. I have found that one blog with only those numbers. No one else is saying that that blog is official!


That blog is official!!


Says you, its creator and gogo and a few other Ron Paul fans here. That's it! I have not seen it used in an official capacity anywhere else on the entire internet, let alone the MSM.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Well I want you to tell me what you think to be fact about anything, and I can give you many sources saying it is wrong. Blog or not, information is information, and "truth" is whatever you want to be right. Which is why I don't even care for "links" anymore because regardless if it is called a blog or is called news, it is still written by a human being, of whom I do not know, never have known, and never will know, so why would I regard what they say to be "truth" in any situation?

The only time I use links is to try to convince people I am right, but the only "facts" I know come from what I experience. And, I know only what I have seen in Colorado, a state where Santorum and Romney were supposedly tied, with Paul doing worse than nearly every other caucus.



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by PhysicsAdept
 


And, here is what I saw with my own two eyes:

Ron Paul Rally (through the eyes of PhysicsAdept)
edit on 25-5-2012 by PhysicsAdept because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I have explained this to you and it is not hard to understand.

The numbers YOU posted are not real. Prove they are.

Now here is why you can't. The delegates are chosen at the state conventions, only a fraction of the state conventions have happened therefore the delegates HAVE NOT been chosen. So you are telling me that Romney has delegates that have not been chosen? Delegates that DO NOT exist?

You are missing the point of the strategy. Delegates are free agents.
Even if you ignore the numbers I posted (which I don't see why it is so hard for you to believe it still has Romney ahead by 300 delegates) the fact remains that the number of delegates you are awarding have not even been chosen so they cannot be for any particular candidate. They decide the number of delegates and who each delegate is at the state and national convention. Why are you trying to deny this absolute fact?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhysicsAdept
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Well I want you to tell me what you think to be fact about anything, and I can give you many sources saying it is wrong. Blog or not, information is information, and "truth" is whatever you want to be right.


Wow you seriously just said this?? I thought the point of this whole website was to deny ignorance. That means, to take a story from the MSM and pick it apart, analyze it, and question it. That doesn't mean to make up your own news, pass it off as truth and facts and then don't question it even since it comes from a questionable obscure source!


Thanx for the laughs everybody!



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


OF course not, they haven't reported anything that puts Ron Paul in a positive light.

Here let me put it in a pro Romney way so you can understand it better.
Ron Paul won the popular vote for the US virgin islands (don't know if you knew that, the MSM barely mentioned it) HOWEVER Romney won almost all of the delegates despite Ron Paul's popular vote win.

Now Ron Paul is doing the same thing to Romney on a much grander scale.

Is it easier to comprehend now?



posted on May, 25 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Yeah, didn't you just complain that the blog wasn't posted on any MSM so it mustn't have truth? By the way, you exist as what? You weren't mentioned or featured by MSM so I guess I cannot listen to a word you say either!

Get outta here! It's your own thread and still I don't think you belong
edit on 25-5-2012 by PhysicsAdept because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join