BREAKING: Ron Paul OFFICIAL STATEMENT on DELEGATE STRATEGY

[jhk07]

exactly there is no law, and rnc rules state no state gop by law can override an rnc rule

Every state has their own laws. Delegates are all bound, all unbound, or a mixture of the two. Look them up.

I didn't say there were laws. YOU DID. Look them up ? Are you kidding me ? WTH ????


"Here Mr Professor, is my 10 page paper on blaaaa. It's all true. If you don't believe me just look it up. "

F fail

 

[tbone717]

If Ron wants the best from us, we deserve the best from him. These e-mails are NOT his best.

Whether we're delusional or not seems to hinge on the binding of delegates. Opinions are split here on that, but the RNC Council's letter carries more weight than what some of you here think. The actions of the GOP and the Romney campaign give credence to that letter's statement. So why the defeatism from the campaign?

Do you have the letter? Because all I have seen is two sentences pulled from a letter and in fact one of them was not a complete sentence as indicated in the original quoting by a bracketed "the".

 

[JWZguy]

its very easy to post.

i am not asking you to trust me.. i am telling you to go do your own research.

I have no way to know which laws you are misinterpreting. If it's easy to post, then do so. So far, sounds like you're full of it.
And yes, you said the words "trust me."

 

[Liberty74]

UGH - those who make false dichotomies to undermine the hard work of people who are fighting for this campaign SICKEN ME. You characterize the people who are busting their asses at local and state conventions to fight for delegates as "cozing up to GOP establishment?"

Believe what you want. So many on RPF do.

The campaign has admitted that Romney will be the nominee. If you are going to be mad at anyone, take your anger out on them as I was not in control of the campaign. If so, we would have won states and those bound delegates. I would have stuck it to the whole freaking system.

 

[Carlybee]

It does make one wonder whether the GOP is savable or whether we need a new party. Not someone else's but our own. We know what we stand for. And if they will 'cause disruption' whenever someone else is winning, and if we can't stomach 'causing disruption' by winning, the future in the party is looking bleak to me at the moment.

But I don't know that that can happen this year.

I think we absolutely need a new party and we know we can raise money. We would need knowledgable leaders and a few Superpacs onboard. IMO the Libertarian party has too much baggage. Just my opinion.

 

[BenMuldowney]

I have no way to know which laws you are misinterpreting. If it's easy to post, then do so. So far, sounds like you're full of it.

i have my reasons for not posting my state's laws. i have yet to attack you.. i like you. i love your passion.

i am feeling the same things you are right now. i have put a ton of energy into this process and i am sharing my opinions.

i am furious with jesse benton and the campaign for the way they have handled this. also, i read yesterday that ron paul criticized some of the more aggressive efforts of our delegates in AZ and/or OK. i am not sure that is true though. if it is true it is time for me to move on.

 

[No1butPaul]

Not dropping out, but can't win the nomination.

Money bomb is still on to win delegates and influence the convention.

good luck with that

 

[JWZguy]

Believe what you want. So many on RPF do.

The campaign has admitted that Romney will be the nominee. If you are going to be mad at anyone, take your anger out on them as I was not in control of the campaign. If so, we would have won states and took it to the whole freaking system.

Your self-righteous posts indicate you expect others to believe you.
Why don't you just post what you're talking about? Until you do, why would you expect anyone to just buy into what you're saying?

I have plenty of anger to go around for anyone disparaging those who work to get RP elected. Why are you here?

 

[sailingaway]

I didn't say there were laws. YOU DID. Look them up ? Are you kidding me ? WTH ????


"Here Mr Professor, is my 10 page paper on blaaaa. It's all true. If you don't believe me just look it up. "

F fail

I know Arizona has a law, because a twit tweeted it to me asking if we were planning on breaking the law by unbinding delegates. It says they are bound on the first vote, by statute, not party rule. The RNC can allow the vote and take it, but then you have to go home and deal with having broken the law of your state.

But I think in MOST states it is not by statute and even where it is they can vote on other things, like unbinding rules for others, VP etc.

 

[JWZguy]

i have my reasons for not posting my state's laws. i have yet to attack you.. i like you. i love your passion.

i am feeling the same things you are right now. i have put a ton of energy into this process and i am sharing my opinions.

i am furious with jesse benton and the campaign for the way they have handled this. also, i read yesterday that ron paul criticized some of the more aggressive efforts of our delegates in AZ and/or OK. i am not sure that is true though. if it is true it is time for me to move on.

Cool - can you post your reasons, then, if you're not posting these laws?

Benton said Ron Paul was concerned - sounds like Benton is not doing enough research on what happened. We followed the rules in the face of violence and corruption. I'm not sure what else the campaign wants us to do. Regardless, our work isn't done until Ron Paul is officially out of the race or is the nominee.

Everyone posting disparaging comments on this thread and others could be phone-banking right now.

 

[kathy88]

Sailing, for a while now I have stated that the brokered convention was mathematically possible, and several times would state what was needed to accomplish it. It always came down to winning primaries. Just in the last week, I posted very helpful info for people that were planning on doing door to door canvassing, because in order to stop Romney Paul needed to win states. It never occurred and we are where we are today.

My statement that you responded to which was asking why people were acting like we were winning when we were so far off the mark. I attribute this to the misinformation that has been spread regarding delegate binding. For a while now, even before the Swann piece, there were people suggesting that bound delegates could vote however they wish. The campaign obviously disagrees with this based upon their statement in the OP.

Let me play devil's advocate here for a sec. There has been so much conflicting info on delegates bound/unboundedness (probably not a word) that I'm not sure what the real deal is. It may be a state by state issue, it may not. Regardless, if there was a chance that a lot of these "bound" delegates could indeed vote their preference in the first round, do you think the campaign would publicly announce and push that? I'm kind of reading this now like, "we" meaning the campaign, aren't going to tell you to give em hell in Tampa and do what you do best.... but it's up to you as INDIVIDUALS to do what you can?

 

[JWZguy]

I know Arizona has a law, because a twit tweeted it to me asking if we were planning on breaking the law by unbinding delegates. It says they are bound on the first vote, by statute, not party rule. The RNC can allow the vote and take it, but then you have to go home and deal with having broken the law of your state.

But I think in MOST states it is not by statute and even where it is they can vote on other things, like unbinding rules for others, VP etc.

If that's true, I'd love to see it - I also believe it's not in most state laws, if any. I do know for a fact how passionate the delegates I've met are and they literally laughed about this issue.

 

[sailingaway]

I think we absolutely need a new party and we know we can raise money. We would need knowledgable leaders and a few Superpacs onboard. IMO the Libertarian party has too much baggage. Just my opinion.

not just baggage, but why deal with THEIR entrenched establishment? Look at their nominations. Honestly, if they thought like we think they'd have held up their convention until after the GOP convention imho. Ron is just that unusual a candidate.

 

[romancito]

Now is up to OWS to save the country. The Ron Paul campaign is owing to science and they are seeking what they already know. They lost their appetite for freedom. They are happy with knowing and gave up trying and experimenting with the new. The Ron Paul campaign aged quite quickly and now it has become part of the past. The future now remains unknown and new ideas and assemblies will be generated that we don't know. But be certain about this, gasoline is coming down for the election of Obama and everything will be dandy for November. After that - KABOOM - the State will fall on everyone like an anvil.

 

[hrdman2luv]

It's not just about this election. It's about changing policy, restoring the party, your donation and Ron Paul's fight helps do that.
It's for the future of the country for the next generation, not just the next 4 years.

This doesn't make laws. And this doesn't change the way the RNC and GOP vote in congress. At our county conventions, we all voted in favor of several resolution, that are meaningless. The establishment doesn't care, nor do they go along with even their own platform.

All I can see that favors these resolutions, is that it might change the eventual rules of the RNC. Which would therefore change the type of republicans that eventually be elected into congress and the Presidency. Which I can see is the ultimate goal. And considering the "ultimate goal", this would make it a lot easier for future generations of liberty minded people to get delegates, run successful campaigns for congressional and senate seats. As it stands right now, only the neocon tea party and 'tow the line" republicans have an easy shot at being elected.
Ron Paul cured a lot of apathy for thousands of people. We have the numbers to change the future of the republican party. We have enough to begin squelching the bias corruption within the GOP.

Was this Ron Paul's ultimate goal? I'm still open to all idea's and reasons for what the Ron Paul and his campaign in doing. Heck, I'm even open to the idea that RP was threatened. And is now taking that threat seriously.

Ross Perot was threatened. And he had enough money to provide security moreso than the POTUS. So the threat he received, had to have come from within the government itself. Possibley the CIA. I know that sounds conspiratorial. But why would someone with so much money (enough to secure himself from some lone wacko), drop out of the race twice?

What ever the reason for this change in plans are, I don't like being forced to wait for an answer. I've already secured my spot at the convention. I took off work many days throughout this whole process. I've donated. Bought T shirts and spent many hours discussing the reasons why we should all support Ron Paul, how he'd change this country as president. A lot of time and effort.
And BY GOD I'm still willing to fight for this cause. I don't want to be thrown under the bus. I don't want my time, money and effort to end in vain.

Make no mistake. Im still in it for a win. But the campaign is walking on thin ice with me.

One more thing. At this site , they report that Romney only has 322 delegates. So why has the campaign reported that Romney has over 900?

 

[smartguy911]

My gut still tells me Dr. Paul is going to win the nomination somehow. Hopefully my gut is right.

 

[sailingaway]

If that's true, I'd love to see it - I also believe it's not in most state laws, if any. I do know for a fact how passionate the delegates I've met are and they literally laughed about this issue.

here's the AZ law, as I said, I agree I think it is unusual, you just have to check out the individual states, too. http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/16/00243.htm&Title=16&DocType=ARS

 

[Carlybee]

not just baggage, but why deal with THEIR entrenched establishment? Look at their nominations. Honestly, if they thought like we think they'd have held up their convention until after the GOP convention imho. Ron is just that unusual a candidate.

Agreed and I should have added I meant we need a new party going forward..it obviously couldnt happen this year and it would apply to us who dont want to spend years embedded with neocons.

 

[kathy88]

its very easy to post.

i am not asking you to trust me.. i am telling you to go do your own research.

Right because he's afraid if he posts it here he will be complicit in a "conspiracy" and get thrown in jail. No wonder we aren't getting anywhere. Bunch of pansies.

 

[smartguy911]

Let me play devil's advocate here for a sec. There has been so much conflicting info on delegates bound/unboundedness (probably not a word) that I'm not sure what the real deal is. It may be a state by state issue, it may not. Regardless, if there was a chance that a lot of these "bound" delegates could indeed vote their preference in the first round, do you think the campaign would publicly announce and push that? I'm kind of reading this now like, "we" meaning the campaign, aren't going to tell you to give em hell in Tampa and do what you do best.... but it's up to you as INDIVIDUALS to do what you can?

Bingo