• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Cult? - Delegates not swearing allegiance ousted by GOP

Help Support Ranchers.net:

djinwa

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
100
Reaction score
0
Location
WA
I’ve been told several times that the Ron Paul supporters are cult members.

Yet it is typical of cults to require an oath of allegiance. And when these delegates in Massachusetts refused to sign such, they were ousted. Reminds me of our county convention when the big government people passed a rule forcing all delegates to declare in their speeches whether they would support the eventual nominee. Gave me a creepy, cult feeling. In my district, none of the Ron Paul delegates, including me, would say such. We declared that principles were more important than party. Which of course, cost us winning delegate slots.

So we see how the process really works. The big government nominee is selected in advance by the party central committees, and then they tell the media who to support and ignore. They then do elections, caucuses and conventions to give people the illusion they have a choice.

Should the “wrong” people (smaller government types) actually win something, they’ll bring in the cops, or close down the meetings, or implement obscure rules to oust them.

And then we send troops to rid the world of tyranny and give people free elections.

What a joke.

Romney campaign ousts Ron Paul delegates - Metro - The Boston Globe
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
So tell us if Paul took a distant fourth behind even those that dropped out of the race should he be allowed to win the nomination because he stacked the Convention delegate counts with his people? Which we all know is what he tried to do by his own admission.

Personally I don't believe there should be that chance, the candidates should be awarded a percentage of the delegate count from each State that represents the percentage of the popular vote they won. If they don't get enough to win the nomination outright, then the delegate count that were won by the candidates that dropped out should be split up between those still in the race at the end, based on total popular vote percentages.

From my experience when you have a certain person that is responsible for voting for the masses, if that person doesn't agree with the masses choice, when the actual vote is taken it seldom represent those who sent them to cast the ballot. If they don't agree they simply vote for what they want (in this case Ron Paul) and tell the masses they did everything they could and the vote went against their choice.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Yet it is typical of cults to require an oath of allegiance


An Oath of Allegiance is a verbal promise in which an individual swears allegiance and loyalty to a particular country, state, monarchy, political institution, individual or group of individuals. In the United States, naturalized citizens, military personnel, and citizens assuming public offices such as presidents and judges, swear their allegiance to the United States Constitution.

http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/oath-of-allegiance.html
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,608
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Great post, Tam, and I agree with your points.

It concerns me that the Ron Paul supporters seem determined to be 'spoilers' when they can't get enough votes to win.

It is also concerning that the opportunity exists for people/groups to enter the race for exactly that purpose: to dilute the Republicans so badly that they cannot win the November elections.

The "my way or the hiway" mentality isn't healthy and rarely represents adherence to our Constitutional rules, IMO.

mrj
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
del·e·gate/ˈdeligit/
Noun:
A person sent or authorized to represent others, in particular, an elected representative sent to a conference.

is this really to hard for the Ron Paul supporters to grasp or are they that sore of a loser?
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
What a joke.

if Ron Paul actually was able to pull off a win and steal the republican nomination I would proudly support a true libertarian.. not some joke like Paul has become..
 

smalltime

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
600
Reaction score
0
Location
SD
Steve sure sounds like a potential sore loser too me.Its good to know that people thik Ron Paul and what he stands for is"a joke".In the last republican primary for county sheriff I went out with the challenger to do some campaining.We stopped in at a local wellknown steakhouse and bar.We went in and made ourselves known and our purpose for being there.This old cowboy at the bar when he found out my friend was running on the constitutional aspect of the sheriffs job,he wanted to know if we had constitutinal drivers licences,We said no .So he gave us a couple and we bought him a beer.As the bartender slaped down the beers I asked him what he thought.He said "If your gonna pull out that old constitutional crap,your ------ daedin the water."I was thirsty but I left that cold one on the counter.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
mrj said:
Great post, Tam, and I agree with your points.

It concerns me that the Ron Paul supporters seem determined to be 'spoilers' when they can't get enough votes to win.

It is also concerning that the opportunity exists for people/groups to enter the race for exactly that purpose: to dilute the Republicans so badly that they cannot win the November elections.

The "my way or the hiway" mentality isn't healthy and rarely represents adherence to our Constitutional rules, IMO.

mrj

Thanks

Anyone thinking that stacking the convention with his hand chosen delegates wasn't Ron Paul's intentions then they were not paying much attention. Through out the whole Primary he has been claiming he was doing good in the delegate count when the numbers after each primary and caucus were showing a complete different story. Not even Ron Paul could have been that delusional unless he had something up his sleeve. He didn't campaign in A LOT of the states as he figured he didn't need to as he would win at Convention whether he won the popular vote or not with he little scheme.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Ron Paul already lost the vote,... by a huge margin,.. now he wants to "subvert" the system we have used for years, just as Obama did in the 08 primaries.. to Obama's credit he did also win a fair share of the popular vote... something Paul failed at or lost..

Steve sure sounds like a potential sore loser too me.

I voted,.. and would want my Representative or delegate to represent my vote..

when a person with no intent on representing my vote or the "will" of the people it can and would certainly make me sore.... and I would do everything in my power to make sure that person is the loser...




Its good to know that people thik Ron Paul and what he stands for is"a joke"

at one point I supported and believed Paul and what he "claimed" to support... he and his supporters lost that claim and credibility when he decided winning was more important then the "Will" of the people..

the "will" of the people and representative government is the foundation of our government... when he decided to ignore that,.. the rest of his ideas crumbled... and Paul now looks like a crazy flake...

Our founders struggled and died so we could today have a voice and a vote... how dare Paul and his supporters steal and subvert that vote....


and then claim to support the Constitution... while stomping on the principles it represents..
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Steve said:
Ron Paul already lost the vote,... by a huge margin,.. now he wants to "subvert" the system we have used for years, just as Obama did in the 08 primaries.. to Obama's credit he did also win a fair share of the popular vote... something Paul failed at or lost..

Steve sure sounds like a potential sore loser too me.

I voted,.. and would want my Representative or delegate to represent my vote..

when a person with no intent on representing my vote or the "will" of the people it can and would certainly make me sore.... and I would do everything in my power to make sure that person is the loser...




Its good to know that people thik Ron Paul and what he stands for is"a joke"

at one point I supported and believed Paul and what he "claimed" to support... he and his supporters lost that claim and credibility when he decided winning was more important then the "Will" of the people..

the "will" of the people and representative government is the foundation of our government... when he decided to ignore that,.. the rest of his ideas crumbled... and Paul now looks like a crazy flake...

Our founders struggled and died so we could today have a voice and a vote... how dare Paul and his supporters steal and subvert that vote....


and then claim to support the Constitution... while stomping on the principles it represents..

Bingo, He claims to strongly support the Constitution then he and his supporters take the attitude win at all cost even if it means stomping on the very way the President is to be elected.
Ask yourself if he is willing to bend his "claimed" steadfast support of the Constitution to get elected what else will he bend/break it for. Will he carry out the will of the people or will he run the govenment like he is running his campaign. He seems to think he can do what he wants to get what he wants, historical rules aside and his supporters are willing to back his play. THAT IS SCARY :roll:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2008
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
0
Location
Heart of Texas
Steve said:
del·e·gate/ˈdeligit/
Noun:
A person sent or authorized to represent others, in particular, an elected representative sent to a conference.

is this really to hard for the Ron Paul supporters to grasp or are they that sore of a loser?

They sound a bit like the old "George Wallace" group.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
28,943
Reaction score
170
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
Tam posted "Ask yourself if he is willing to bend his "claimed" steadfast support of the Constitution to get elected what else will he bend/break it for. Will he carry out the will of the people or will he run the govenment like he is running his campaign. He seems to think he can do what he wants to get what he wants, historical rules aside and his supporters are willing to back his play. THAT IS SCARY."

Why wouldn't he think that? He's watched Obama do it for 3 years
now. :mad:
 

Latest posts

Top