Greenpapers debunks Stealth Delegate Theory- For the last time!

This will be my last post about Ron Paul. I am sure someone else will make a post about his tampa speech and about him suspending his final campaign. My good friends at the greenpapers (well it’s not like I know them personally or anything. They have just helped me learn and understand the primary process and the inner workings of the GOP so much for the past few months that I consider them personal allies in the world of politics) has put together a nice piece on the so-called stealth delegate conspiracy theory pulled out of the Ron Paul fanatics’ butts.

Independent columnist and staff member on the Greenpapers Richard E. Berg-Andersson along with their entire staff has been hit with hordes of angry emails from Ron Paul supporters claiming that their information is wrong (they make up a bunch of new conspiracy theories which the staff considers nonsense and quite hilarious) and that Ron Paul has all these so-called stealth delegates in hiding which will reveal themselves at the convention!

Richard E. Berg-Andersson talks about three major points in his paper and I want to add a few thoughts of my own.

Andersson’s points:

1. Mitt Romney officially has enough bound delegates to declare himself the nominee!
2. The Ron Paul Stealth Delegates will have no legal case against the GOP, RNC, or the office of the Presidency if Mitt Romney is elected in November
3. The MSM will lightly cover the Tampa convention in a negative tone

My Points:
1. Mitt Romney has enough problems to worry about
2. The MSM is not ignoring Ron Paul, they barely acknowledge republicans in general
3. The GreenPapers show their math and actually does follow the real rules.

1. Mitt Romney officially has enough bound delegates to declare himself the nominee! No stealth delegates equal the amount of delegates bound to Romney, Santorum and Gingrich (Santorum and Gingrich delegates are of course likely to support Romney). There are 1329 Delegates bound to Mitt Romney as of this time. 185 more than needed. There needs to be 185 stealth delegates right now to combat that number just to keep Romney under water. Not to mention that there are only 283 uncommitted delegates. Most of which Mitt Romney is going to get at the convention. Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich in total has no more than 394 delegates bound to them and most if not all of those delegates will pledge their support to the GOP front runner—in this case Mitt Romney come convention time. Let’s say Ron Paul who has 98 hard count delegates gets all of the uncommitted delegates 283 and all of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich’s delegates 394. 98+283+394= 775. If we use the same calculations but take Paul’s total from the Real Delegate Count site which I Debunked already than 98 is replaced with 229. 229+283+394= 906 Delegates. Ron Paul will never hit the magic number!

2. Andersson asks two questions for Ron Paul supporters to consider. 1) Will the courts even entertain this stealth delegate strategy? And 2) How would you even bring this about in the courts? Short of suing every republican, the RNC, the GOP, and Fox News. Plus somehow determining if random republicans are or are not in your Ron Paul fan club to gather enough people to have a class action lawsuit against a political party is absurd. There are factions in the Ron Paul community now, good luck getting them altogether for a lawsuit! (some may not want to leave their parents’ basements )

3. Andersson points out that besides for a loud internet cult like following and a few moneybombs the Ron Paul movement is actually not really all that interesting… You guys are complaining about lack of coverage, but what exactly do you want the MSM to cover? Fist fights at state conventions should be kept for local news coverage unless someone gets shot or killed. Nobody wants to hear politicians talk…People barely want to listen to President Obama talk. So why would anybody want to listen to some crazy old kook who talks about things outside of normal politispeak. The normal everyday American does not care about ending the fed. They don’t even know what the fed is! Yeah, it may be ignorant, but there is no law saying you need to know what the fed is and be against said fed to live here. It’s a free country people have many different interests. Ron Paul gets his speeches in when necessary, they are on TV! They are on YouTube. I don’t know what else you could ask for except for a Ron Paul TV Channel (which is something he should do with all his millions.)

My points:

1. Mitt Romney doesn’t need people in his own party doing this stealthy illegal maneuver to get someone elected that doesn’t appeal to 85% of the US population! He has enough problems to worry about. The Republican Party is divided and the Ron Paul Hard Cores are not helping in the least bit. At least, the Tea Party is starting to rally around Mitt Romney because they can compromise. If Romney wins, Obama is gone. Point one! If Romney wins, tea party ideals will be heard. Point number two! Why can’t the paulsters do the same?

2. The liberal media is NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, and mostly any newspaper or website you come into contact with unless specifically stated otherwise. They are never going to look at republicans in a friendly way. I suppose this is why Mitt Romney is having trouble in his own party because there are actually positive stories about Romney in the Media! They are few and far between, but they exist. Mitt Romney is a moderate, some even call him liberal. If Obama is elected, I believe that Mitt Romney will be the first republican the liberals in the media actually look upon with favorability. Hopefully changing the stigma republicans have in the media from being a hard core religious fanatic creationist (which Ron Paul actually is!). In the crusade against the liberal media, Ron Paul is no help.

3. Richard E. Berg-Andersson and all those who work at the Greenpapers staff should be honored for being a truly independent source of information not spammed with hate email. They have been working on election delegate math and primary data for the past decade! They have no reason to lie now. The Greenpapers has been a wonderful source of non-partisan information for me as I learned more and more about the delegate process and the primaries this year. I started to follow the republican primary from the beginning for the first time this year. I knew nothing about delegates, and barely anything about what the primary was. On different internet forums the Ron Paul people drew me farther away from their crazy conspiracy theories and actually forced me to learn everything I can about this process so I can debunk them any chance I get. So thank you Ron Paul fanatics!

My Conclusion: You actually have to believe in the conspiracy theory that your vote (the popular vote doesn’t count) to actually even attempt to understand the thinking of some of the most hard core Ron Paul supporters who still attach themselves to the hypothetical (from the beginning) Ron Paul stealth delegate theory!

Do I expect anything positive to come out of my summary of this bipartisan article from an independent news source which the paul fanatics claim to love? I doubt it. But it was worth a try! Won't be seeing you in 2016

www.thegreenpapers.com...

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Here is the problem. I'm going to come out and say that I didn't read your full post yet because the topic title is enough for me.

Considering the Greenpapers has simply been FLAT WRONG in the past as I have shown in other topics and many others have shown, making assumptions on delegate counts themselves much like the AP, why should I give them any credence whatsoever when dealing with this situation?

I am expected to believe the source from one PRO-ESTABLISHMENT website that the strategy doesn't work, the same site that his been debunking Ron Paul's chances and strategies since the beginning and the same site that has proven its clear establishment agenda, yet I am to disbelieve all of the amateur research that has been done on the subject as well as the LEGAL statement that have been made?

This is just beyond me. The only thing I can say is thank you. I'm glad this will be your last topic because, hoo boy, it wasn't like YOU had an agenda or anything. Definitely not obvious at all.

And now having skimmed over your points, it still doesn't touch base on the idea of bound delegates and should they choose to ignore their "bound" status.

Time and time again people keep ignoring that elephant in the room or just writing it off like it can't happen when there are plenty of sources already proving that it CAN HAPPEN.

And I'll be honest right now - the only way Ron Paul still stands a chance, and this should be on the minds of every Paul supporter, is if those bound delegates do indeed vote for Paul instead of Romney or abstain from voting - a question that STILL has yet to be answered definitively as to whether or not it will be allowed, even though there is plenty of evidence stating that the bound status of the delegates is not even recognized at the National Convention, but only on the state selection level.

Once again - anyone who thinks this is over until the convention is a moron.

reply to post by jjf3rd77

I admire the energy and persistence you've put into this topic. I found the legal analysis in the Greenpapers article not quite convincing, but very persuasive.

We're now at the stage where Romney is leaving Paul behind. There might be a shout or two from people belatedly realizing that the train is pulling out, but it won't matter. There's really nothing more you can say. Paul supporters are being invited aboard, but you can't make them take the ride.

I hope Paul supporters have a massive party in the next month or two and start planning for the 2014 elections. Keeping the revolution alive is the best goal now.

Originally posted by gwydionblack
And now having skimmed over your points, it still doesn't touch base on the idea of bound delegates and should they choose to ignore their "bound" status.

Time and time again people keep ignoring that elephant in the room or just writing it off like it can't happen when there are plenty of sources already proving that it CAN HAPPEN.

And I'll be honest right now - the only way Ron Paul still stands a chance, and this should be on the minds of every Paul supporter, is if those bound delegates do indeed vote for Paul instead of Romney or abstain from voting - a question that STILL has yet to be answered definitively as to whether or not it will be allowed, even though there is plenty of evidence stating that the bound status of the delegates is not even recognized at the National Convention, but only on the state selection level.

Once again - anyone who thinks this is over until the convention is a moron.

You didn't read my post or the article, because if you did you would now understand the impossibilities of your fantasy.

1. The math doesn't add up no matter what way you do it.
2. Your vote doesn't count conspiracy is needed to believe half of what you are saying.

I did the math for the uncommitted delegates.

Originally posted by gwydionblack
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

I am expected to believe the source from one PRO-ESTABLISHMENT website that the strategy doesn't work, the same site that his been debunking Ron Paul's chances and strategies since the beginning and the same site that has proven its clear establishment agenda, yet I am to disbelieve all of the amateur research that has been done on the subject as well as the LEGAL statement that have been made?

This is just beyond me. The only thing I can say is thank you. I'm glad this will be your last topic because, hoo boy, it wasn't like YOU had an agenda or anything. Definitely not obvious at all.

well at least the greenpapers toyed with the idea...The MSM doesn't even care about your theory. And the only ones who are saying that it is true are ron paul supporters. Until, someone in the establishment democrat or republican or even ron paul himself acknowledges the stealth delegate theory will work...I trust this independent research, because as far as I know. These guys are the only people who actually has researched your theory.

Point to me other sources of legal, mathematical truth that sides with your conspiracy theory. Then I may be able to believe you.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

We're now at the stage where Romney is leaving Paul behind. There might be a shout or two from people belatedly realizing that the train is pulling out, but it won't matter. There's really nothing more you can say. Paul supporters are being invited aboard, but you can't make them take the ride.

Paul supporters give young republicans like me a bad rap. I see the shocked look on people's faces when I tell that I am republican and in fact do not support Ron Paul. It's a stigma in the republican party that most young republicans support Ron Paul. They don't think I am knowledgeable about politics or the government because they automatically brand me as a crazy conspiracy theorist (which I once was back when was I in grade school!)

It is only now that I realize how naive and stupid I was to be chasing said fantasies. I am on this website to try to bring balance to things that get sensationalized. Which is almost every topic on this website.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

They don't think I am knowledgeable about politics or the government because they automatically brand me as a crazy conspiracy theorist (which I once was back when was I in grade school!)

and you did so much research that you now believe what the gov says is the truth, so much so that you will come day after day spouting how much you enjoy what they are doing, how much of a mittens fan you are, and that you dont like the insults from other person supporters, all the while insulting them yourself. Such hope for the future of the republican party.


Edit to add that if you had researched any part of your government, its agencies, or its policies you would most certainly find some conspiracy; Therefore, since you are no longer a conspiracy theorist you either have proof,( no longer a theory) or have not done the research you claim to have done.

edit on 8-6-2012 by eazyriderl_l because: (no reason given)

reply to post by eazyriderl_l


I didn't insult myself.

I realized I learned and grew up. Something ideologues should consider

That is also not against you. I just know that as soon as anyone really looks into what the government is doing and why they will become more suspicious of them, not less. I have seen this proven time and again.

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
That is also not against you. I just know that as soon as anyone really looks into what the government is doing and why they will become more suspicious of them, not less. I have seen this proven time and again.

Well w/e you are free to believe what you want, but this theory as corrupt as it is has been proven not to work!

I don't think Ron Paul would want to win in this corrupt way.

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l


Edit to add that if you had researched any part of your government, its agencies, or its policies you would most certainly find some conspiracy; Therefore, since you are no longer a conspiracy theorist you either have proof,( no longer a theory) or have not done the research you claim to have done.

edit on 8-6-2012 by eazyriderl_l because: (no reason given)

This is about one section of the government. I do believe in certain conspiracy theories such as watergate that was real. I have never believed in this one. Mitt Romney is it. I never say I love Mitt Romney do I? I am excited for him, and the party, and isn't that better than still hanging onto some wishful questionable theory that will probably never work?

reply to post by jjf3rd77


I did not say you insulted yourself. I said that you say you dont like conversing with certain candidates' supporters because the insults they throw around, all the while, insulting them, YOURSELF. But i am certain you can re-read what was posted.

Back on topic hopefully and sorry if i derailed.
So you are saying that it is a conspiracy theory that the popular vote doesnt matter. If that is only theory than what did i miss in the Gore/Bush election, or are these still just theories?

how would paul supporters feel if ron earned a delegate, but he voted for romney ?


yeah, conspiracy !!!!

Also if you are excited then great, dont let me ruin that. I am just saying that there have been, in just the last three elections, multiple counts of fraud, election rigging, and ballot tampering. Any person who tows the line of the parties involved with those messes with draw the scorn of anyone who is hoping for real change

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

Back on topic hopefully and sorry if i derailed.
So you are saying that it is a conspiracy theory that the popular vote doesnt matter. If that is only theory than what did i miss in the Gore/Bush election, or are these still just theories?

You are derailing again, and the gore/bush thing has been talked about on many different occasions. I'm sure you can find two conflicting sides of the story just as you find here. I am merely presenting a different more mathematical and lawful truth than I have seen in the past.

Just look at past history and you will see. It's rare if abstain votes happen and if they do...It's likely the result will have little impact on the national election!

reply to post by syrinx high priest


I cannot speak for them. I would feel he/she voted her heart or her wallet. Who would vote differently?
Maybe you?

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
Also if you are excited then great, dont let me ruin that. I am just saying that there have been, in just the last three elections, multiple counts of fraud, election rigging, and ballot tampering. Any person who tows the line of the parties involved with those messes with draw the scorn of anyone who is hoping for real change

Which has never been proven or investigated. Actually the democrats have had larger cases of said voter fraud which has been proven damaging to their party.

Originally posted by eazyriderl_l
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

I cannot speak for them. I would feel he/she voted her heart or her wallet. Who would vote differently?
Maybe you?

I have personally seen Ron Paul supporters come to their senses and say they will help the republican party nominee get elected into the white house. Mitt Romney has a greater chance of swaying Ron Paul delegates than Ron Paul has of doing the same. Romney has the power of the party behind him. Ron Paul does not.

If you don't like it, form your own party! Oh Wait you already have one. Gary Johnson sure could use your help

I hope your political assumptions are more correct than you personal assumptions. I wanted to know more about a candidate and that is why I have participated in your back-handed discussions. I was involved in this political cycle because, like last time, I had hope for change; However, thanks for the constant assaults and assumptions from you and the so called "priest". I guess even tame vipers will protect the pit.