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: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 12:32 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. 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.



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


But that's still not enough to think you would get change. Even with Ron Paul. You have an entire Congress to contend with. Any President or Presidential candidate can get as specific as they want about their personal policies, you have to vote in a Congress willing to back those visions and policies. Well, only a certain number of seats are up for election every two years. To realistically turn over Congress to the point that any President could get his policies in place would take more than the potential eight years of Presidency, and by that time the American voting public will have lost patience.

That is what Ron Paul the President would face.




posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
 

But that's still not enough to think you would get change. Even with Ron Paul. You have an entire Congress to contend with. Any President or Presidential candidate can get as specific as they want about their personal policies, you have to vote in a Congress willing to back those visions and policies. Well, only a certain number of seats are up for election every two years. To realistically turn over Congress to the point that any President could get his policies in place would take more than the potential eight years of Presidency, and by that time the American voting public will have lost patience.

That is what Ron Paul the President would face.

True - I was speaking here only about voting for the office of president itself, as we definitely have a lot of work to do with Congress.

There is a decent bit of good a president can do to right some serious wrongs on his own (mainly as regards foreign policy, revoking invalid executive directives, not signing off on bad legislation or the extensions of HORRIBLE legislation, education the people, so on and so forth), but you are absolutely correct beyond that point - and this is one reason I'm glad Paul has motivated so many to become active in the process, as we do have a good number of liberty candidates and recent electeds coming up at all various levels of government. In fact, I'm somewhat tinkering with the idea myself.

Take care.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Praetorius
 


And in that regard, Ron Paul has done a significant service in bringing fresh blood into the political process. I may not agree with many of his ideas, but if his campaign has gotten more of the American public to become politically active, whether that is getting out to primaries to vote, educating themselves on politics, or considering what they can do to make a difference personally, then they have succeeded in a time when politics is certainly in need of it.

To that end, he has done well and should be proud.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
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)


You find Ron Paul not getting the nomination funny? He was our last chance to get America back in order. I will still be voting for him even if I have to write his name in. How can you say that "I have no doubt that most Paul supporters will end up voting for Romney come November?" That just shows that you have no idea how strongly Ron Paul supporters are for their candidate.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by mysterioustranger
 


There are a few states that don't allow write-ins. Virginia for one does not allow them. As a result I will not be voting as I don't support any of the candidates.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcalibur254
 


Get an absantee vote form and write him in anyway, if you can't find anyone to vote for by that time. Might not count, but if enough people do that, it sends a message at least.



posted on Jun, 7 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
OH NO...Ron Paul conceded?

Uh...no he didn't. But isn't that what you're supposed to do when you know you're going to lose?

hmm. I read Ron Paul"s email today...and I read between the lines.

Did any of you?

Oh, and btw OP, very ignorant to think any of us RP supporters would even think of voting for anyone else.

Obviously you're far from getting it...as many of you still are.

That's all I will say here.

Peace




top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join