It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Paul on his delegate count: "not enough to win the nomination"

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Ron Paul has made it clear, he will not win the nomination


Texas Rep. Ron Paul acknowledged in a message to supporters Wednesday evening that he will not end up with enough delegates to win the Republican presidential nomination -- an obvious statement that may still come as a disappointment to the congressman's hard-core supporters.

Paul urged his backers to use the Republican National Convention in Tampa as an opportunity to advocate for their policy priorities, and pointed to several down-ballot races where like-minded candidates could use support.

(Also on POLITICO: The 25 best quotes from Ron Paul’s 2012 campaign)

"When it is all said and done, we will likely have as many as 500 supporters as delegates on the Convention floor. That is just over 20 percent! And while this total is not enough to win the nomination, it puts us in a tremendous position to grow our movement and shape the future of the GOP!" Paul said in the message. "There are many issues to fight for in Tampa. Also, candidates like Justin Amash, Kurt Bills, and Thomas Massie need your support as we move into the fall."

www.politico.com...

The funniest part of the article is that he predicts he'll have as much as 500 delegates come convention time. That's not going to happen, not by a long shot. Nevertheless Ronnie is not banking on winning the nomination, and I'm not surprised. To me Ron Paul stopped taking his run toward the nomination seriously when he decided to not actively campaign in major states like Florida or Texas, or when he stopped actively campaigning, period. It was just his supporters that were in serious denial (and many of them still are on this board). I'm beginning to think that Paul's agenda and goals are not so much in line with those of his supporters.

These two statements from both Ron and Rand Paul are very interesting:


"And while this total is not enough to win the nomination, it puts us in a tremendous position to grow our movement and shape the future of the GOP"


Rand Paul:

(on Ron Paul) "he's been nothing but an asset to the Republican party. He's brought alot of youthful enthusiasm, alot of indepedents, alot of people who have become disgruntled with the Republican party:

www.youtube.com...

I have no doubt that most Paul supporters will end up voting for Romney come November, most of them will inevitably fall in line. But nevertheless both Rand and Ron Paul have been doing a good job returning voters to the fold, the GOP needs all the support they can get. Romney is also being smart in not attacking Ron Paul, he'll be smarter in taking on Rand or Ron Paul onto the ticket as well.
edit on 6-6-2012 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Hmm...I think I'll still write in Ron Paul.


"The world is going to end if we have another 4 years of Obama"


edit on 6-6-2012 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by satron
 


Well atleast you're voting Satron. You're better than those who insist they 'won't be voting' because they're disgruntled. I think the worse thing you can do is not vote, if don't vote in my opinion you have no real legitimate reason to complain. I'm writing in Kucinich, what are the chances of him getting in? It's about the principal I guess.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Pretty decent choice of a write in. I am still voting Paul again myself.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Meh we'll see. 500 delegates, 0, or 1144... Ron Paul has already done his part in changing things, being an asset to the overall thought process of voters. I don't think he'll win, but I bet he would have if the system was less biased and manipulated.

Still though, I know who I am voting for in 2012. And it ain't same ol bottom of the shoe obamney.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by satron
 


Well atleast you're voting Satron. You're better than those who insist they 'won't be voting' because they're disgruntled. I think the worse thing you can do is not vote, if don't vote in my opinion you have no real legitimate reason to complain. I'm writing in Kucinich, what are the chances of him getting in? It's about the principal I guess.



You don't change the system by ignoring it, and pretend that "this isn't happening" with your fingers plugging your ears. People that don't vote are pretty lost, I agree. Pro-activity is what we need, but I fear it will become an increasingly hard thing to do now. Should have while it was easier.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 
I personally couldn't care less about "disgruntlement" - if I don't have anyone WORTH voting for, I'm not going to bother. Romney may talk a good game (according to some people, anyway...), but I'm still waiting for someone to give me 3 fundamental and significant differences between his and Obama's policies.

Romney believes every bit as much in big government as Obama does, looks down on states' rights every bit as much as Obama does (despite what leaks out his mouth), is by admission more militarily-aggressive (and even less understanding of proper foreign policy) than Obama is, has evinced himself not to understand the fiscal situation this nation is in and as such refuses to take the hard medicine - which will allow the gangrene to continue spreading, and from his past history in politics, can't be trusted on even what he's not entirely incorrect about.

It might be a shade over a dime, but there's not enough difference between the two or love of liberty in either for me to bother. We're right back to the choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.


edit on 6/6/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 
I personally couldn't care less about "disgruntlement" - if I don't have anyone WORTH voting for, I'm not going to bother.


You still have the choice to vote for who you want, and if you're really abstain from voting, well, that's why you lose, AGAIN!



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by satron
 
Oh, don't mistake me - if I have someone worth voting for, I will still vote. I'll have to see who all makes the ballot here in Oklahoma, but I am giving Johnson a strong look and will also consider others who might be available.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 
I personally couldn't care less about "disgruntlement" - if I don't have anyone WORTH voting for, I'm not going to bother.


But that is the beauty of a write in vote...You can vote for who ever you want. You don't have to just pick either Obama or Romney. You can vote for anyone....

You can vote for yourself if you want! Who ever you think will be the best person for the job you can vote for... And you may think it is a waste to go vote for some one as a write in...It's not...Your voice matters and if you don't allow your voice to be heard....

Well, then you will be stuck with more of the same crap that you don't like...

If you want things to change then you have to get out there and make the effort to change things... Not voting is not the answer...You are not required to vote for these candidates they are spoon feeding us... Any Natural born citizen of the United States.... THEY are all your candidates....

I am going to be doing a write in for who I think is best for the job... It's a matter of principal for me...The only wasted vote is one you don't make...

You have millions more to choose from then the two you are being spoon fed...Choose wisely.


Peace and love

See you around the boards.
edit on 6-6-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: Correcting a typo.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by satron
 
Oh, don't mistake me - if I have someone worth voting for, I will still vote. I'll have to see who all makes the ballot here in Oklahoma, but I am giving Johnson a strong look and will also consider others who might be available.



It's appalling to me that people will vote for someone they don't agree with, just because they think it will vote another person out of the position, and just as much as someone who is dissatisfied with the system that won't vote at all. If that's done enough, then it's inevitable that you'll have politicians that you don't like that much. It's how we got to crap and douche.
edit on 6-6-2012 by satron because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by gimme_some_truth
 
Fair enough, and possibly true. I will consider a possible write-in vote.

Regardless if SG is correct or not in thinking most Paul supporters will toe the party line and vote for Romney (which I have sincere doubts about, personally), you can definitely count this one out.

Be blessed.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:34 PM
link   
i will be writing in ron paul when i vote as well.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by satron
 
I can sympathize with the view. I have to push it a bit further, though, and lament the lack of serious self-education and involvement in the early election cycle and the pirmaries and caucuses, myself - these are the deciding races to help us prevent the douche/turd split, and due to low involvement at that point leaving most of the voting and selection to be done by party regulars who typically support establishment candidates, well...

Granted, if there IS an option in the general election worth supporting (or a protest vote one can motivate to make), well and good...but we sadly rarely end up with those good options who remain viable due to the abysmal levels of participation early in the game.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by satron
 
I can sympathize with the view. I have to push it a bit further, though, and lament the lack of serious self-education and involvement in the early election cycle and the pirmaries and caucuses, myself - these are the deciding races to help us prevent the douche/turd split, and due to low involvement at that point leaving most of the voting and selection to be done by party regulars who typically support establishment candidates, well...

Granted, if there IS an option in the general election worth supporting (or a protest vote one can motivate to make), well and good...but we sadly rarely end up with those good options who remain viable due to the abysmal levels of participation early in the game.



The arcane workings of the delegate process need to be streamlined so it's more accessible for the average person. We seen this cycle that it's not as easy as it was taught to us in high school. But you can still vote for who you want. And everyone should vote for who they feel is in touch with their own values, not for the guy that they don't feel very familiar with just to get another guy out.

Something about the process is amiss when the primary process can't get rid of the douche/crap paradigm. Most of it is because the voters let it get that way.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 



Also, Ron Paul admits that delegates are in fact bound.


“What's more, we will send several hundred additional supporters to Tampa who, while bound to Romney


So hopefully his supporters will take that as a cue that Ron Paul himself recognizes that delegates are bound and doesn't wish for his supporters to break their bindings.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Ron Paul had a great big loud run. But with only 11% of the popular vote, there was never a chance. I still stand by my prediction that he will retire at the convention, telling his supporters to back Rand Paul later...



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I am sorry to hear this but not suprised......
facts are that the majority of Americans have succumbed to the bull#$%t propaganda machine.
Still thinking were # 1,! were #1!
It amazes me the arrogance of the typical US stance on anything worth discussing....
The US had better take a long hard look at itself soon, or go the way of Rome or every pother hedgemony that has existed.....
What fools to have wasted the opportunity to remake the world into a fairer better place for all humanity, but they had to ef it all up with selfishness and empty bravado.....



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Ron Paul is a jam up guy.

But as much as he wants to "play by the system" and safe face, I think the time for that is already over.
The fact of the matter is that come Tampa, the delegates should and hopefully will do what I have anticipated the entire time, and that is vote for Ron Paul, regardless of their bound status.

As I said many times before, you cannot change a system if you play by the set of rules given to you specifically set in order to ensure that the system stays in plays. It is now or never and if the delegates to not take it upon themselves to act for the sake of the country - then this country is in fact doomed.

Doomed to a financial collapse, another world war, and ultimately a second revolution that will not be far behind.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Heres an open-ended question:

1. Is there even a box or line on each ballot from and in each state to WRITE anyone in?
2. Even if there is/was...and he got a zillion penciled in votes..would it be legal?
3. He still wouldnt have to accept it anyway...right?




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join