General

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

logcabin — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:47:53 GMT

Just passing this along since it is sooooooooo optimistic and feeds my desire for such right now.

PEOPLE PLEASE STOP LOKING AT THE POPULAR VOTE IN THE STATES PLEASE READ HOW WE ARE ACTUALLY WINNING.

Posted February 10th, 2008 by SGP

PLEASE EVERYONE COPY AND SEND THIS TO THIER EMAIL LIST AND MEETUP HEADS AND ANY OTHER RON PAUL FORUM THERE IS.

The MSM is not reporting how to become the nominee in a situation like this so i will tell you to stop gettin g your info from the MSM.

I know many of you are bummed about yesterday BUT THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE ELECTION SYSTEM WORKS : Let me explain to you the reality of how to become the nominee.

First stop looking at who wins each states popular vote for most of these states the vote by the people is really nothing but a straw poll and have no real bearing on who will become the nominee. The only way this matters is if 1 person receives 1191 delegates that are bound by state rules to be commited to that candidate. So if a candiate like Mccain has 600 delegates now and IF he doesn't reach 1191 WHICH HE WILL NOT most of the delegates the state awarded him mean nothing and keep in mind in most of the states most of the people that represent the 600 for Mccain are actually Ron Paul supporters. NOW there is no possible way that anyone in the race can achieve this goal now because of the major split in state wins by the candidates.

Normally Convention Delegates do not matter because the convention is not brokered and we have a clear winner because someone has 1191 delegates. BUT THIS YEAR IS DIFFERENT. This will be a brokered convention there is no way around it. Do you see how the ronpaul campaign strategy will work.

When a candidate wins delegates by winning a primary that does not mean there are actual people that won acting as delegates- these are virtual delegates.

What do I mean by virtual delegates: A virtual delegate is just a number - there are no actual people YET that will go and vote for the candidate who won the particular state at the national convention. We call these people convention delegates

The actual delegates are voted on (in most states) at a statewide delegate caucus after the Primary (which is just a giant preference poll) Who can be delegates? Anyone. In closed Primary states they must be registered Republicans, in Open Primary states they can be Republicans, Democrats, Independents.

And we have lots of delegates.

Out of the 2,380 delegates sent to Minneapolis St. Paul in September-
-463 delegates are bound all the way through the convention some of those 463 are Ron Pauls people.

- 565 delegates will be bound through one ballot. That is, they have to follow the results of the state election on the first ballot. After that, if no candidate has a majority of delegates, they are free to vote as they please and Mccain will not receive over 50% on the first ballot.

- 383 will be bound through two ballots then they are free to vote for whom they wish.

- 318 will be bound through three ballots then they are free to vote for whom they wish.

I am not going to list every state and what the break downs are, just do the math from these numbers or look for yourself here :

http://www.gop.com/Images...

Bottom line is less than 1/2 of the delegates are bound by state party rules. Now do you see how we can win this thing?

So what happens now you ask? You look at the number of delegates that Dr. Paul has that are uncommited to the other candidates and will support him. these delegates are not decided by the popular vote ie: straw poll of the people. Since no one will have enough delegates to skate them through to the nomination we now must look at how many delegates NOT VOTES but delegates Dr. Paul has that are 100% uncommited to the other candidates and will be 100% for Dr. Paul and are free to vote for whom they wish.

This race will go all the way to the convention for there is no other way for someone to receive the nomintaion untill the convention.

The RNC will convene its annual Winter Meeting - and voters will continue to cast their ballots in the nation's primaries and caucuses. Candidates for delegate and alternate delegate to the convention will be elected - and thousands of convention participants and guests will begin planning their trips to Minneapolis-Saint Paul The first week in September 2008

SO WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN?

This means that all of the people that registered to become a deligate for Dr. Paul can go to the convention and cast thier vote for Dr. Paul, now think about what i just said : Do you think for one second that all the people that voted for Dr. Paul and filed to become a deligate will not show up at the convention to vote for the good Doctor? Of course they will just like they battled the rain and the sleet and the 15 below zero winter weather to knock on doors and wave signs spreading our message.

Now i assure you that even though we didn't win the popular vote in many states WE DID PICK UP THE MAJORITY OF DELEGATES THAN ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES IN MOST EVERY STATE EXCEPT A FEW. So yes they won the straw poll and we won what counts which is delegates.

Doesn't Dr. Paul need to WIN 5 states to be on the ballot at the convention for the nomination?

NO THIS IS NOT TRUE for people were just confused on how it actually works.

We only need the majority of delegates from 5 states to be put on the ballot NOT THE POPULAR VOTE OF 5 STATES and i assure you we have picked up the majority of uncommitted delegates for Dr. Paul in more than 5 states.

Do any of you remember seeing posts by myself and many others that said BECOME A DELEGATE? There is still time in most states to become a delegate for the convention and we are picking up more of them every day.

So please STOP! you worry too much because you do not understand how the election system works and you thought we lost didn't you?

The fact is Dr. Paul is a genius in his strategy and we are further ahead in delegates than you think and we can win the nomination.

I hope this gives a better understanding of how we have been winning even though most of you thought we were not.

NOW LET'S KEEP WORKING FILE TODAY AND BECOME A DELEGATE BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

Dr. Steve Parent

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

Brunnersj — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:20:19 GMT

To Byzantine:

It's an interesting approach, however with your short-sightedness you may give others hope in his ideals and may foster people taking heed in his words (rantings). Yes it will bring it down, but can it be rebuilt? Don't you agree that education is the cure for this malaise we have on our hands here? Educate those around you about the ideals that you hold dear; hopefully you can use Dr. Paul (and Mises and other great thinkers) as a tool in that teaching. It's small steps that will bring about the greatest of changes.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

Kakugo — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 22:27:37 GMT

Fellows, fellows, try to calm down.

I've started this topic to see what good the Paul campaign has left in its wake and if this good will have any positive impact not in only in the US but all over the world (I am sure there's plenty of "Johnny Foreigners" watching his Youtube videos and approving).

As I've already said everybody knew he wasn't going to win, we were just hoping for a good result. And came a good result. No, scratch that, an excellent result.

Most Libertarians, Austrians or whatsover fail to completely understand how deeply ingrained is "Red State Fascism". People is told from the cradle to the grave to "support the troops, trust the police, obey without questioning, it's for your own good, we'll take care of you etc". It's such an unrelenting stream of propaganda and social taboos that it's incredible that someone even manage to break free of the circle. The Ron Paul movement brought many of these persons together, showed them they are not alone and that, surprise, their numbers are larger than expected. If something good will come out of it, it's too early to know.

Let me spend a few words about the failed "smear campaign". Most persons believed that there's either a conspiracy at work or some hireling wishing to please his master. There's not: most of the smear comes from persons with very little to do or from those who lost all faith in mankind and hence have nothing better to do than simply moan and complain ("all politicians are the same", "nothing will ever change", "why do you fight? It's useless!" etc) since it's so much easier and less tiring than rolling up your sleeves and get to work to improve the situation just a little bit.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

ViennaSausage — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:05:51 GMT

Seriously. Most republicans I know would rather vote for Hillary before voting for John McCain. The republican would go to Hillary or Obama.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

libertarian — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:01:09 GMT

Byzantine:
I'm going to start sending money to John McCain.

John McCain cannot win against the Democrats.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

RealEulogy — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:05:50 GMT

I agree with this. Win or Lose, Ron Paul has got the message out. I'm probably one of the 10 libertarians in Canada, and I used to watch Ron Paul before he was in the race, watching his speeches and they were great. The problem was no one ever got to hear them. The media never touched him.

Now they have to listen. People get to hear his message during the debates and people have liked them. Though I do find him sort of bumbly with his words, he's pushing out the real messages of limited small government, individual liberty and a humble foreign policy.

His campaign is bigger then himself. Win or Lose, there will be even more "Ron Paul's" running in all walks of government.

Re: Ron Paul: Write In's

libertarian — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 21:33:32 GMT

I don't care about Ron Paul anymore. There are only three candidates left in the race: Mike Huckabee, John McCain and Paul. See -- I am not optimistic

Re: Ron Paul: Write In's

libertarian — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:43:02 GMT

We may have won Florida but these pessimistic skeptics (the Grassroots are included) decided to not "focus" on FL but still got comparable votes with top-tier candidates and more votes than any other state. I was for a head start and momentum, but everyone was disinclined, and focused on funding stupid fundraisers that the campaign did not even spend, only on crappy commercials. A waste of money. Unlike other candidates, the Ron Paul message is permanent! Once they hear the freedom message, they would not even think of researching others. This compaign is different: we need to convert as early as possible, as many as possible.

Re: Ron Paul: Write In's

Sean_M — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:05:03 GMT

i've never heard of mark lawson before, but he was doing an interview with mitt romney, and halfway through had an epiphany and dropped his support of mitt and declared at the end he'd vote for ron paul. he cites mises a few times in the actual interview, and mitt brushes it off and says he laughs at paul's ideas of smaller government.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6lAFfLy05_Y

Re: Ron Paul: Write In's

Bank Run — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:35:55 GMT

I see oportunity, nay-sayers may be fatalistic determinists.

Challange the system!

Do any of all'yall see a more electable libertarian. Look Dr. Block for prez 'nall, taint jiving. So will the liberwhackian party offer someone who can compete on a level with the Representative Paul. Geeee, a chance for all the other third partiers too.

If a dead guy could win out, truth will win out.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

ViennaSausage — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:15:22 GMT

He has started a revolution. This revolution is more powerful than any president could be. I never imagined that I would be this passionate not only about a candidate, but what he stands for, true liberty, the constitution, and limited government. No other candidate out there comes close. Ron Paul has already won.

Re: Ron Paul: the aftermath

John Delano — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:04:33 GMT

I expect that we will find many people for the rest of out lives who will tell us that they were first introduced to libertarianism in 2007 / 2008 when Ron Paul ran for president. There are quite a few people who have been libertarians for years now who first learned of the ideas because of a Libertarian Party presidential candidate.

I decided last year when I started getting involved in his campaign that him winning the election wasn't the only goal. And regardless of what happens with the election, I will still think it was worth my efforts. If Ron Paul announced that he is quitting tomorrow, I would still be glad I did what I did for many reasons.

If Ron Paul not being elected would make you feel that your efforts or money were wasted, you should probably put your efforts and money elsewhere.

I have thought over the years that if we could get a decent number of people to simply not co-operate, we could have a lot of success. 5% of the population would be plenty. I think we could do it with far less. I would also like to get more people to be willing to put their efforts into hanging juries.