Yep I never understood this either. I'm not sure why they think this is important. I'm struggling to understand what a few hundred delegates can do that will actually matter. I can't think of much.
its gaining long term momentum. I can understand that much. But there are some conflicts that need to be addressed. For instance, with Ron Paul's dedicated supporters, does it really take money to whip up on lackadaisical establishment supporters in caucus voting? I don't think so. This much was proven. So given the limited funds available, why were resources not spent to shore up campaign weaknesses rather than buttress a clear and overwhelming advantage in terms of depth of support and organization?
I can understanding enhancing the strength to try and hit pressure points, but the rhetoric from the campaign did not align with the actions. Money was spent on early beauty contests. But when those didn't go well, that is when we started hearing how much those didn't matter. Well, why spend money on them!?
Also, does anyone in the campaign know math? It was clear that even if Ron Paul swept every single state and district convention in the caucus states, he STILL wouldn't have enough delegates on the first ballot. So we needed to have Gingrich and Santorum take enough bound delegates in the primaries in order to effectively nullify a first ballot win for Romney. This is if there was a sweep at the caucuses! So clearly, Ron Paul needed to do some lifting in the primaries on his own, and without relying on those he was relentlessly attacking with big ad money. So where was the Alamo? Could the campaign not identify this mathematical reality?
The long term growth of this movement depends on gaining popularity. Remember the exponential growth conversation after 2008? How is that going to continue in 2016 if we continue to ignore half the country because of there nomination rules? Even with a nice chunk of delegates there to represent the ideas of the future, they still have to deal with the fact that they do not control the party. Don't be surprised when the party further refines it's rules to block this hostile take over.
We need all states on board, not just delegates from a few special cases. In order to do this, the campaign for liberty and the Ron Paul revolution leadership will need to stop ignoring states. There needs to be ground up growth, but there also needs to be a presence. Ron Paul is an icon. He is a leader that people rally around. His value to the movement at this point is that he can inspire people and motivate people politically. This was always his strength.
It doesn't take 10 million dollars to show up at a rally in states with binding popular votes. But if you really want to win, and if you really believe your message is popular, you go to these states when the political awareness is at it's highest and you show up. Even if you know you are going to lose.
It's good that the movement will be showing up sending a message to the establishment. But at some point, I think, you have to fight them strength on strength. That isn't going to happen at their special nominating beauty contest.