Former RNC Chairman, Michael Steele criticizes Romney/RNC for the treatment of Ron Paul.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
For him to run 3rd party would mean he knows he will lose but he would still pull votes away from the Republican Party at a crucial time when conservatives want to get the most radical, leftist, Marxist, Progressive, socialist President in American history out of office. It would be an absurd move. (unless he thinks he can pull votes from Democrats too)
I checked a Tea Party website and they are not really big on Romney, but I'm pretty sure they still would prefer a Republican right now.
The time to form a new 3rd party affiliation is not just before an election. Tea Party formed after the election of BO not before. If Romeny gets elected and doesn't make good on his promises, the Tea Party will revolt.

edit on 1-9-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-9-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

I've talked to enough republicans to know that if Ron Paul ran independent, the GOP voting body would slowly jump ship and go for Ron. The only reason people support Romney is for unity, other than that, they don't even like the guy.

That and, yes, I strongly believe democrats would go for Ron, so would indies. I've repeatedly stated on ATS that our Ron Paul grassroots office is located in Venice Beach, CA, an extremely liberal beach town and Ron Paul is very very popular here.

Damn. What did they do to piss off Michael Steele?

Originally posted by eLPresidente
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

just to clarify.

he never said he wouldn't run 3rd, he has always consistently said that nothing is absolute and he did not have plans to do it.

I may very well be mistaken on the precise wording for painting himself into a corner...although, you have to admit, in spirit, there isn't much doubt what he's meant all along. I had thought he made the definitive statement at one of those interviews the media pushed and pushed..but I have to admit I can't recall for certain where or when.

At this point, my main hope is that the energy and need for change is not forgotten after November as has happened with the Tea Party after the mid terms. It's like they'd done what mattered...so thanks for coming everyone and have a nice life! (???) What was that all about?!? If we are ever going to change things, it can't be an ADHD driven fad...It's going to take years of constant and non-stop effort.

If the 'Ron Paul Experience' as I've come to think of how so many of us learned the system from the inside, thanks to him, does nothing else...it's the hope that it will keep people mad and knowledgeable about how to direct that anger into real change 4 years from now.

We gotta hope....giving up isn't something I'll do myself.

The republican convention was a sham, that is why I am voting against Mitt.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Just watching the delegate count confirms what Michael Steele says.
That was awful ... the GOP didn't even acknowledge the Ron Paul count.
They ignored it when counting the delegate count back on stage.

SUCKY!

Why awful? Ron Paul doesn't represent the views that Romney represents. At least, Romney is not selling out, and including others just for their vote. He doesn't want anybody with him that is not in complete agreement with him. It's Romney's way, or the highway. All the tactics used in the convention maneuvering demonstrates how the fight will be fought come November. Regardless of the number of votes "aye" and "nay", they will attempt to claim the "ayes" have it, but this time it will be Republican verses Democrats, like the days of George Bush verses Al Gore when they "stopped the count". Same strategy. Same game plan. Let the people get to cast their vote to have their say, just for the show, but declare Romney the winner regardless.

It's the republican way.