Ron Paul Supporters Cause County Convention Chaos

[BrooklynRedLeg]

BrooklynRedLeg, how about you make a prediction on how many delegates Ron Paul and his mentally retarded supporters can hoist over the will of Republican voters?

The will of the Republican voters? I have to ask if you suddenly believe that the Diebold E-Voting Machines are reliable? I also have to wonder why the fuck you care? Are you saying you're a Republican voter?

[TimothyC]

BrooklynRedLeg, how about you make a prediction on how many delegates Ron Paul and his mentally retarded supporters can hoist over the will of Republican voters?

The will of the Republican voters? I have to ask if you suddenly believe that the Diebold E-Voting Machines are reliable? I also have to wonder why the fuck you care? Are you saying you're a Republican voter?

Answer it for me then please. While I am no longer an active member of the party, I still tend to vote republican.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

Answer it for me then please. While I am no longer an active member of the party, I still tend to vote republican.

Fine. I think its probable that Dr. Paul will pick up enough delegates to end Mitt Romney's chances of being the nominee automatically. It will likely be a Brokered Convention and Dr. Paul has as good chances as any of the others. Romney has been crammed down our throats by the goddamn Party goon squad and their shithead media allies for almost a year now and its getting tiresome.

[TimothyC]

Fine. I think its probable that Dr. Paul will pick up enough delegates to end Mitt Romney's chances of being the nominee automatically. It will likely be a Brokered Convention and Dr. Paul has as good chances as any of the others. Romney has been crammed down our throats by the goddamn Party goon squad and their shithead media allies for almost a year now and its getting tiresome.

Fascinating. If we presuppose that Romney doesn't wing and the Paulite plan to win on the second ballot fails (which at this point, it probably will), Representative Paul has fewer backers than the other candidates. To me that implies that he does not have as good of a chance as the others. I'm rather moderate for the modern republican party, but if faced with a decision to vote for Representative Paul or President Obama, I'm fairly sure I'd vote for President Obama (In reality I'd probably vote third party) - and I'm not the only one. A friend of mine in the GOP made the comment about the health of the republican party to me: "Best case scenario is Romney winning. Second best case is Obama winning over nut job [Representative Paul]. Worst case is nut job [Representative Paul] winning. If he [Representative Paul] wins, it sets us back for a generation."

That's what the mainstream of the party thinks. The mainstream of the party don't think it will be brokered, or even up in the air at the convention, but if it is, a moderate (relative to the republican party) will get the nod, and Representative Paul goes away.

[Simon_Jester]

If it gets brokered, I doubt it'll be between Romney and Paul. More likely for it to be Romney and Santorum, with Paul and Gingrich's supporters acting as wild cards and peanut galleries.

[TimothyC]

If it gets brokered, I doubt it'll be between Romney and Paul. More likely for it to be Romney and Santorum, with Paul and Gingrich's supporters acting as wild cards and peanut galleries.

I don't think Gingrich will back Sanitarium, and I'm damn near 100% certain that Representative Paul won't either.

One thing I do find funny is that this gentleman here [BrooklynRedLeg] forgets that most of the time, the candidate has it locked up by now. The fact that Romney doesn't have it 100% locked up means that later voters are getting their say in the process - and they are not voting for Representative Paul (in significant numbers anyway).

If it does go to the convention, and Romney doesn't have the votes, one theory I have seen thrown about is that Representative Paul throws his support behind Romney to get the gold standard as a plank and his son as the VP. I'd love to see the reaction on the Paulite faces when they are told by their fearless old fart to vote for Romney.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

I'd love to see the reaction on the Paulite faces when they are told by their fearless old fart to vote for Romney.

You don't seem to understand us at all. Typical. Well, hope you enjoy getting strip searched by the Cops for a traffic offense just before you get thrown in Gitmo. You will only have yourself to blame.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

BTW, here is something maybe you should think about....



The simple fact is the amount of voter fraud that has occurred so far is staggering. I know when I cast my vote early here in Tampa, the goddamn Diebold machine didn't even pop up showing WHOM I had voted for and that is entirely suspicious.

[Civil War Man]

Dude, do you have something against Ron Paul's academic achievements or something?

He's just throwing jabs at the insistence of Paul supporters to refer to him as Dr Paul at every opportunity. It's like constantly referring to Jim Webb as Lieutenant Webb or Scott Brown as Colonel Brown.

I'd personally rate the constant use of "Doctor Paul" and Tim's "Representative Paul" reaction to be about equal levels of smarminess.

[TimothyC]

I'd love to see the reaction on the Paulite faces when they are told by their fearless old fart to vote for Romney.

You don't seem to understand us at all. Typical. Well, hope you enjoy getting strip searched by the Cops for a traffic offense just before you get thrown in Gitmo. You will only have yourself to blame.

The use of such rhetoric is one of the reasons why Paulites are openly mocked. I do care about civil liberties, I care a great deal. However, when I take the whole of the policies that Representative Paul supports, I find myself in opposition to them. I rank things differently than you do, and differently than Adam here does, and Simon does, and Shep does, and any number of other people who most here do. This fact does not make any of us intrinsically wrong in our rankings, but it does mean that we will come to different conclusions based on the same inputs. I come to the conclusion that the destruction of Federal authority would be a net negative for this country (I'm an Eisenhower/Nixon republican), while you don't. What is problematic is when the Paulites try to shove their minority opinion down the throat of the rest of the republican party in the name of 'what the people want'.

I know when I cast my vote early here in Tampa, the goddamn Diebold machine didn't even pop up showing WHOM I had voted for and that is entirely suspicious.

I see no strong evidence of fraud at all - just the typical voting irregularities that crop up in any election cycle. And if you have issues with the voting machines, it seems like you should address those at the level where the machines were purchased. I've never had a single issue with a Diebold voting machine, and I'm from Ohio (for the record, I didn't give my entire vote to Romney this year).

Dude, do you have something against Ron Paul's academic achievements or something?

He's just throwing jabs at the insistence of Paul supporters to refer to him as Dr Paul at every opportunity. It's like constantly referring to Jim Webb as Lieutenant Webb or Scott Brown as Colonel Brown.

I'd personally rate the constant use of "Doctor Paul" and Tim's "Representative Paul" reaction to be about equal levels of smarminess.

Oh, it's incredibly smarmy, and I do it for the express purpose of grinding the gears of the Paulites.

It's also valid because at the end of the current congress he will have spent a nearly 23 of the past 40 years in the House of Representatives. That's a lot of time as a politician. I wonder why his supporters want to not be reminded of it.

[Alkaloid]

I see no strong evidence of fraud at all - just the typical voting irregularities that crop up in any election cycle

Timothy, did you watch that Maddow clip? Because it isn't conclusive, but if what she is talking about there is accurate then there is something very strange going on in the Maine republican party, and if rules are not being bent or broken then they are certainly being manipulated in order to achieve someones desired outcome. I don't see any way you could say that the results for a county being recorded before that county has called in to report them is a typical voting irregularity, I would actually say it's at best an outright alarming irregularity, and at worst it is evidence of fraud at least compelling enough to have an outside agency have a very serious look at what went on there.

[TimothyC]

I see no strong evidence of fraud at all - just the typical voting irregularities that crop up in any election cycle

Timothy, did you watch that Maddow clip? Because it isn't conclusive, but if what she is talking about there is accurate then there is something very strange going on in the Maine republican party, and if rules are not being bent or broken then they are certainly being manipulated in order to achieve someones desired outcome. I don't see any way you could say that the results for a county being recorded before that county has called in to report them is a typical voting irregularity, I would actually say it's at best an outright alarming irregularity, and at worst it is evidence of fraud at least compelling enough to have an outside agency have a very serious look at what went on there.

There are glitches that happen in every election cycle, this is nothing new. Most of the time, the glitches are smaller than the margin of victory. I also note that other than the official total, no numbers for these counties were ever given. I wonder why...

Also, Maine was a non-binding caucus - so it had as much of an effect on the apportionment of delegates as the Missouri one.

[Lonestar]

Dude, do you have something against Ron Paul's academic achievements or something?

Fun fact: this is very likely his last year in congress: he went all in on the presidential race and is not running in his district this year.

You never hear(or read) people refer to Lawyer politicians as "Senator _____ Esq" or owners of PhDs as (for example) "Dr. Gingrich".


Someone who is talking up something that has little to do with Pauls qualifications as a government official, while not extended the same to otehr politicians, is being silly.

So, why is it that only Ronulans refer to only one politician(their cult leader of choice) as "Doctor"? Why can't we make a jab against these idiots when they do this? BrooklynRedlegs won't refer to Mitt by his title(Governor Romney), but oh man


Doctor Paul

[bobalot]

BrooklynRedLeg, how about you make a prediction on how many delegates Ron Paul and his mentally retarded supporters can hoist over the will of Republican voters?

The will of the Republican voters? I have to ask if you suddenly believe that the Diebold E-Voting Machines are reliable? I also have to wonder why the fuck you care? Are you saying you're a Republican voter?

Ron Paul has managed to get an anaemic 11% of the popular vote. Any strategy that seeks to make the nominee over the other 89% of voters who didn't vote for him is shitting all over the will of Republican voters.

Why I care is irrelevant to my argument, retard.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

Ron Paul has managed to get an anaemic 11% of the popular vote. Any strategy that seeks to make the nominee over the other 89% of voters who didn't vote for him is shitting all over the will of Republican voters.

11% according to whom, you fucking asshat? According to a primary and caucus season that is already rife with fraud?

Why I care is irrelevant to my argument, retard.

Actually, its not irrelevant. Its called mind your own fucking business and we'll mind ours.

[Alphawolf55]

Answer it for me then please. While I am no longer an active member of the party, I still tend to vote republican.

Fine. I think its probable that Dr. Paul will pick up enough delegates to end Mitt Romney's chances of being the nominee automatically. It will likely be a Brokered Convention and Dr. Paul has as good chances as any of the others. Romney has been crammed down our throats by the goddamn Party goon squad and their shithead media allies for almost a year now and its getting tiresome.

Why does Ron Paul have as good as chance of any? Why not Mitt or Rick who both got more votes than Paul? Why would the delegates when unbound choose a candidate who by all accounts isn't very liked by his party and quite frankly doesn't have positions that resonate with the general public (Cutting the budget by a trillion, making capital gains tax 0%, claiming that the 14th amendment shouldn't apply to states, believing that we can't raise taxes on the rich, being against health care reform). Why would they not choose Romney or an outside candidate that polls better in the general election?

[SirNitram]

Ron Paul has managed to get an anaemic 11% of the popular vote. Any strategy that seeks to make the nominee over the other 89% of voters who didn't vote for him is shitting all over the will of Republican voters.

11% according to whom, you fucking asshat? According to a primary and caucus season that is already rife with fraud?

What sort of fraud are you alleging?

[Crossroads Inc.]

He is a Paulite, it is Inconceivable that anyone could not be enthralled with his message of how to magically fix the world. Therefor any and all reasons for his utter failure to capture or win votes is due to a massive evil conspiracy of "The Media" and the Far Right to put him down.

I have heard this countless time from Paul Fanatics. The fact that people simply think Paul is an utter nutcase is something that could not possible be the case.

[bobalot]

Ron Paul has managed to get an anaemic 11% of the popular vote. Any strategy that seeks to make the nominee over the other 89% of voters who didn't vote for him is shitting all over the will of Republican voters.

11% according to whom, you fucking asshat?

According to the numbers (hint: the popular vote tally), Paulbot. You know, the the popular vote tally I fucking referred to earlier in this thread and even linked to?

As of this post, the numbers are:

Code: Select all

4,554,756 - Romney (40.6%)
3,190,151 - Santorum (28.4%)
2,282,387 - Gingrich  (20.3%)
1,187,046 - Ron Paul (10.5%)
--------------------
11,214,340 - Total

Or as I like to prefer, I organised the the results into multiples of Ron Paul's popular vote tally.

Code: Select all

Romney - Approximately 4x Ron Paul's popular vote.
Santorum - Approximately 2.8x Ron Paul's popular vote.
Gingrich - Approximately 2.0x Ron Paul's popular vote.
Ron Paul <---  lol

According to a primary and caucus season that is already rife with fraud?

Do you have any actual evidence of this massive conspiracy against Dear Leader Ron Paul that would explain his horrendously bad popular vote tally?

Why I care is irrelevant to my argument, retard.

Actually, its not irrelevant. Its called mind your own fucking business and we'll mind ours.

How is Ron Paul's campaign "not my business", asshole? It's a public campaign and this is the News and Politics section of Stardestroyer.net. I wasn't aware that commenting on Ron Paul should be restricted to a select few. You should let the moderators know about this new rule.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

Why does Ron Paul have as good as chance of any? Why not Mitt or Rick who both got more votes than Paul?

Cause for one thing there won't be Diebold machines that can be manipulated. There also won't be Caucus assholes who cancel said caucuses where Dr. Paul was strong (as in Maine). Significant difference when its broadcast on television and thousands of cellphone cameras are around.

Why would the delegates when unbound choose a candidate who by all accounts isn't very liked by his party and quite frankly doesn't have positions that resonate with the general public (Cutting the budget by a trillion, making capital gains tax 0%, claiming that the 14th amendment shouldn't apply to states, believing that we can't raise taxes on the rich, being against health care reform).

A large hunk of the fucking populace wants the budget cut starting with our overseas wars. What the hell do you think the Tea Party movement was about? As for 'health care reform', Dr. Paul is considerably in favour of it. Maybe not your 'give more goddamn money/control to the fucking insurance companies' ala Obamacare, but Dr. Paul has consistently talked about the problems with our health care system.

Why would they not choose Romney or an outside candidate that polls better in the general election?

Uh, what?

http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-obama-rasmussen-555/

Romney, Santorum and Gingrich cannot draw Independents and Democrats. Period. There will be no way to unseat Obama without a 'coalition' in the General Election. Even Republican insiders are starting to repeat this fact.

[TimothyC]

Why does Ron Paul have as good as chance of any? Why not Mitt or Rick who both got more votes than Paul?

Cause for one thing there won't be Diebold machines that can be manipulated. There also won't be Caucus assholes who cancel said caucuses where Dr. Paul was strong (as in Maine). Significant difference when its broadcast on television and thousands of cellphone cameras are around.

Let me explain something to you. A majority of both the republican party (those like me who tend to vote for Republicans, but are not members of the party) and the Republican Party (active members) don't like Rep. Paul. They don't like what his policies would do, and they don't like his style.

You have, in your posts, implied that Rep. Paul has been 'robbed' of votes in this election. How many votes would you say has he been 'robbed' of? Is it enough that he would have received more votes than say, Dr. Gingrich? Is it enough that he would have received more projected delegates than Dr. Gingrich?

Romney, Santorum and Gingrich cannot draw Independents and Democrats. Period. There will be no way to unseat Obama without a 'coalition' in the General Election. Even Republican insiders are starting to repeat this fact.

There is almost never a way to win against an incumbent without pulling all parts of the Party together. That's a fact of election politics.

[Simon_Jester]

Rachel Maddow has a doctorate? Huh.

Well, I wouldn't be surprised- but I think it says more about Maine than it does about Paul. Just as Santorum does well in rural states full of evangelicals, a disproportionate number of New England Republicans are likely to be libertarians.

[bobalot]

Hey, BrooklynRedLeg, no comment on the 10-11% of the popular vote Ron Paul has managed to scrounge up? Just how much "vote rigging" do you think is taking place?

BTW, did you like the tally where I organised the results into multiples of Ron Paul's popular vote?

[Alphawolf55]

A large hunk of the fucking populace wants the budget cut starting with our overseas wars. What the hell do you think the Tea Party movement was about? As for 'health care reform', Dr. Paul is considerably in favour of it. Maybe not your 'give more goddamn money/control to the fucking insurance companies' ala Obamacare, but Dr. Paul has consistently talked about the problems with our health care system.

A large part of the populace wants military spending cuts, a large part of the country does not want the complete cuts Ron Paul is proscribing. And what meaningful Health Care reform that would actually decrease costs does Ron Paul support.

http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-obama-rasmussen-555/. Romney, Santorum and Gingrich cannot draw Independents and Democrats. Period. There will be no way to unseat Obama without a 'coalition' in the General Election. Even Republican insiders are starting to repeat this fact..

Oh come on don't be daft. You know as well as I do that the moment Paul became the nominee his support would drop because quite frankly his positions would become known. Liberals and moderates don't want a President that wishes for capital gains tax to be 0%. The majority of the people like Social Security and Medicare, they don't like the idea of bills like the We the People Act or competing currencies. They may not like wars like Afghanistan and Iraq but they don't want to have a completely non-interventionist army. They don't wish to close down the EPA nor get rid of the student loans of the Department of Education. They don't want a President that's for even less regulation. They don't want a President that tells women that they share some of the blame if they stay at their job after being sexually harassed. They don't want a President that doesn't believe in the 14th amendment.

It's one thing to believe that Ron Paul is right in his views, but you clearly don't understand the general American voter if you think that they love the type of medicine Paul proscribes. I'm from NH, my state got to meet Ron Paul up close and personal and while yes Ron Paul did poll well in the state there's a very good reason why people chose Romney instead and it's because they don't like what Ron Paul stands for.

[BrooklynRedLeg]

Hey, BrooklynRedLeg, no comment on the 10-11% of the popular vote Ron Paul has managed to scrounge up? Just how much "vote rigging" do you think is taking place?

Sorry, but I don't have internet access 24-hours a day. As for the poll, last time I checked, polls lie all the time. What, did you never know about the fact that polls can be manipulated by asking certain questions?

BTW, did you like the tally where I organised the results into multiples of Ron Paul's popular vote?

Which popular vote? Asking who? Asking what questions? I'm sure if the poll is taken of Republican Insiders, Dr. Paul will do poorly.