an easy question.

[Steve]

or is it...

Has Ron Paul actually won any states popular vote?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html

Paul barely lost Maine yet captured an overwhelming majority of the delegates.. :shock: the marginal winner has 2, while Paul took 21 delegates..

Santorum took Minnesota by over 7 thousand votes yet Paul took 24 delegate,... double the amount allocated to Santorum...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html

something fishy ... or just plain old dirty politics?

 

[Lonecowboy]

or is it...

Has Ron Paul actually won any states popular vote?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html

Paul barely lost Maine yet captured an overwhelming majority of the delegates.. :shock: the marginal winner has 2, while Paul took 21 delegates..

Santorum took Minnesota by over 7 thousand votes yet Paul took 24 delegate,... double the amount allocated to Santorum...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html

something fishy ... or just plain old dirty politics?

did Ron Paul target the popular vote? no and he made no bones about it, he has said from way back he was targeting delegates as his strategy. did he break any rules? none that I can see.
there are more ways to skin a cat than sticking his head in a boot jack and yanking on his tail!

 

[Tam]

or is it...

Has Ron Paul actually won any states popular vote?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html

Paul barely lost Maine yet captured an overwhelming majority of the delegates.. :shock: the marginal winner has 2, while Paul took 21 delegates..

Santorum took Minnesota by over 7 thousand votes yet Paul took 24 delegate,... double the amount allocated to Santorum...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html

something fishy ... or just plain old dirty politics?

did Ron Paul target the popular vote? no and he made no bones about it, he has said from way back he was targeting delegates as his strategy. did he break any rules? none that I can see.
there are more ways to skin a cat than sticking his head in a boot jack and yanking on his tail!

So what you are saying is Paul and his supporter really don't give a rat's butt about what the MAJORITY OF VOTERS want they only care about the choosen few that happen to be delegates. That is SICK and puts a new meaning to the saying the end justify the means. :roll:

 

[Lonecowboy]

or is it...

Has Ron Paul actually won any states popular vote?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_vote_count.html

Paul barely lost Maine yet captured an overwhelming majority of the delegates.. :shock: the marginal winner has 2, while Paul took 21 delegates..

Santorum took Minnesota by over 7 thousand votes yet Paul took 24 delegate,... double the amount allocated to Santorum...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.html

something fishy ... or just plain old dirty politics?

did Ron Paul target the popular vote? no and he made no bones about it, he has said from way back he was targeting delegates as his strategy. did he break any rules? none that I can see.
there are more ways to skin a cat than sticking his head in a boot jack and yanking on his tail!

So what you are saying is Paul and his supporter really don't give a rat's butt about what the MAJORITY OF VOTERS want they only care about the choosen few that happen to be delegates. That is SICK and puts a new meaning to the saying the end justify the means. :roll:

no what I am saying is that Ron Paul knew he was getting delt from a stacked deck and it would take lots of money and media fairness and a "untarnished" vote count to win the popular vote so he didn't go after it because it is basically meaningless anyway- he targeted the vote that actually counts! smart thinking! :shock: will it work?? time will tell!

 

[Tam]

did Ron Paul target the popular vote? no and he made no bones about it, he has said from way back he was targeting delegates as his strategy. did he break any rules? none that I can see.
there are more ways to skin a cat than sticking his head in a boot jack and yanking on his tail!

So what you are saying is Paul and his supporter really don't give a rat's butt about what the MAJORITY OF VOTERS want they only care about the choosen few that happen to be delegates. That is SICK and puts a new meaning to the saying the end justify the means. :roll:

no what I am saying is that Ron Paul knew he was getting delt from a stacked deck and it would take lots of money and media fairness and a "untarnished" vote count to win the popular vote so he didn't go after it because it is basically meaningless anyway- he targeted the vote that actually counts! smart thinking! :shock: will it work?? time will tell!

Party conventions used to be a forum where power brokers would barter potential votes of delegates in return for favors. The party conventions are more open and televised now, and such vote buying has steadily decreased. Today party conventions are mainly a formal display of which candidate won the right to represent the party in the presidential elections. Officially, delegates assemble at the convention to cast their votes. For the first vote, most delegates will vote for whom they represent, according to the pledge they took. Usually after the first vote, the one candidate overwhelmingly chosen in the public vote is also chosen in the delegate vote and becomes the official presidential nominee. Sometimes, however, the popular vote is very close. Because some states award delegates based on proportion while others award delegates based on winner-take-all methods, the first delegate vote might not yield a clear majority. If this is the case, a second delegate vote will be taken. During the second vote, the delegates are now allowed to vote their conscience, meaning they are not bound to vote for the candidate whom they officially represent. Such conscience voting can dramatically alter the nomination process granting the party mantle to the candidate that did not receive the most popular votes. Most of the time, party convention votes reflect the public's choice.

Now let's see Romney has 1191 delegates plegded to him as of his Texas win and Paul is the only other candidate running still. So if all those that are pledged to Ronmey vote the way they are pledged on the first vote at the Republican Convention please explain what makes you think Paul running a distant fourth in delegate counts, with a pledged 137, is going to win the nomination?

 

[Steve]

So what you are saying is Paul and his supporter really don't give a rat's butt about what the MAJORITY OF VOTERS want they only care about the choosen few that happen to be delegates. That is SICK and puts a new meaning to the saying the end justify the means. :roll:

no what I am saying is that Ron Paul knew he was getting delt from a stacked deck and it would take lots of money and media fairness and a "untarnished" vote count to win the popular vote so he didn't go after it because it is basically meaningless anyway- he targeted the vote that actually counts! smart thinking! :shock: will it work?? time will tell!

Party conventions used to be a forum where power brokers would barter potential votes of delegates in return for favors. The party conventions are more open and televised now, and such vote buying has steadily decreased. Today party conventions are mainly a formal display of which candidate won the right to represent the party in the presidential elections. Officially, delegates assemble at the convention to cast their votes. For the first vote, most delegates will vote for whom they represent, according to the pledge they took. Usually after the first vote, the one candidate overwhelmingly chosen in the public vote is also chosen in the delegate vote and becomes the official presidential nominee. Sometimes, however, the popular vote is very close. Because some states award delegates based on proportion while others award delegates based on winner-take-all methods, the first delegate vote might not yield a clear majority. If this is the case, a second delegate vote will be taken. During the second vote, the delegates are now allowed to vote their conscience, meaning they are not bound to vote for the candidate whom they officially represent. Such conscience voting can dramatically alter the nomination process granting the party mantle to the candidate that did not receive the most popular votes. Most of the time, party convention votes reflect the public's choice.

Now let's see Romney has 1191 delegates plegded to him as of his Texas win and Paul is the only other candidate running still. So if all those that are pledged to Ronmey vote the way they are pledged on the first vote at the Republican Convention please explain what makes you think Paul running a distant fourth in delegate counts, with a pledged 137, is going to win the nomination?

it is easy.. just because you are supposed to represent your delegation, by most state party rules,. the national rule is not specific nor is there an actual requirement to vote for those you represent..

"In what may be the most stunning revelation of the ongoing GOP presidential nomination process, it has been discovered that in 2008, the RNC Legal Counsel legally interpreted the RNC rules and concluded that all delegates, regardless of state party rules, could vote for whomever he or she chooses at the Republican National Convention.

by stacking the delegate deck with Paul supporters they hope to subvert the process and ignore the will of the people..

it goes against everything we have ever been taught about states powers/rights over federal issues.. and is basically the same game Obama played...

thus my rational for saying I would not vote for Paul.

 

[Steve]

deleted duplicate post.

 

[Tam]

I hear about Ron Paul he is a sticker for the Constitution in the way of States have the power not the Federal Government. So would he not be breaking his own promise to uphold what he believes the Constitution stands for if he took National RNC rules over the individual States rules? I guess the ends justify the means even to the Ron Paul campaign and his supporters. :roll: