Delegate Strategy Question

[newbitech]

That makes no sense and i hope that was a joke considering how long you've been a member. So your saying it's Ron Paul's fault that his supporters are smarter then most people and go out of their way to run as delegate because that's how the system works?

link? LOL I mean I agree, Ron Paul supporters dig for the truth and get to the bottom of things(except for the delegate process for some strange reason), but have you seen the polls? Most of Ron Paul's support come from uneducated, young, poor people.

 

[Sematary]

If RP comes in dead last in popular votes and accepts the nomination on delegate deception the movement is dead. I will NOT vote for RP under those circumstances.

I would vote for Ron Paul under those circumstances because it is a legitimate political strategy and under ANY circumstances ai would prefer Ron to be my president Also, if it is fair for the gop and the media to lie to voters and cause them to vote for a different candidate then I feel it is perfectly fair to use the process as it is currently set up to try and win the nomination through a brokered convention

 

[newbitech]

Except that lobbyists bribe lawmakers with billions of dollars to change the rules to suit their needs.

yeah, but it's legal. Look, I understand that it's within the rules. Great, but really how do you like telling people their vote and their voice are silenced?

We the people vs we the 1144 Ron Paul delegates. Not gonna be the kind of movement we want.

 

[mmadness]

I think the problem is the confusion between popular and majority.

52% vs 48% - both are popular

40% vs 28% vs 20% vs 12% - 40% is popular 28% is not, 20% is not, 12% is not.

Slippery slope. Either you have the delegates or you don't. Them's the rules of the game.

The founding fathers designed it this way so that a tireless, enthusiastic minority can change the establishment.

 

[mmadness]

yeah, but it's legal. Look, I understand that it's within the rules. Great, but really how do you like telling people their vote and their voice are silenced?

We the people vs we the 1144 Ron Paul delegates. Not gonna be the kind of movement we want.

OK, so what exactly is the kind of movement we want? Thanks for speaking for me and others by the way.

If you're not willing to accept a solution (probably the most likely) that leads to RP being the nominee, then why?

 

[alucard13mmfmj]

It simply is not possible to win the nomination without winning states despite some of the foolishness you might read.

The larger state primaries are all after April 1st and are winner take all with bound delegates.

At some point Gingrich and Santorum will drop out of the race and endorse Romney giving him all their delegates. There won't be a brokered convention because of this.

that is what i think will be happening... there is no other way why the other candidates are winning and taking turns taking turns being alpha male. its not in their interest to have a brokered convention and they will do everything to stop it from happening. santorum and newt is just there to go all the way and have some delegates to pledge to romney =|.

 

[69360]

It is important to win states, but assuming that Gingrich or Santorum will drop out and endorse Romney is just guessing at this point. It could end up being a brokered convention.

If one candidate gets a majority of the delegates before then, then fair credit to them. But until then, we ain't seen nothing yet.

Even assuming the very slim possibility of a contested convention, Ron would not win at the convention. The others would band together and cut a deal.

All this delegate strategy is just talk and completely ignores how presidential politics work in this country. Romney played the game, dropped out when he was told last time and got his place as standard bearer for the next election. Santorum and Gingrich will do the same when they are told for their shot next time or an administration position.

Obama and Clinton fought a nasty primary and then she endorsed Obama for SOS, that's how the game is played.

 

[newbitech]

Slippery slope. Either you have the delegates or you don't. Them's the rules of the game.

The founding fathers designed it this way so that a tireless, enthusiastic minority can change the establishment.

Sam Adams said this in reference to starting a bloody revolution. You want that? Cause if you don't your tireless minority needs to become the majority.

That's not a slippery slope, them the rules. You don't win the nomination without popular support. You need a majority to win.

Popular -

of, pertaining to,or representing the people, especially the common people​

28% is NOT representing the people.

Majority -

a number of voters or votes, jurors,or others in agreement, constituting more than half of the total number.​

obviously he needs delegates.

 

[jctii0]

yeah, but it's legal. Look, I understand that it's within the rules. Great, but really how do you like telling people their vote and their voice are silenced?

I have no problem at all. If others are too ignorant to educate themselves about a process that has been in place for years, that's not my problem.

 

[newbitech]

Even assuming the very slim possibility of a contested convention, Ron would not win at the convention. The others would band together and cut a deal.

All this delegate strategy is just talk and completely ignores how presidential politics work in this country. Romney played the game, dropped out when he was told last time and got his place as standard bearer for the next election. Santorum and Gingrich will do the same when they are told for their shot next time or an administration position.

Obama and Clinton fought a nasty primary and then she endorsed Obama for SOS, that's how the game is played.

maybe now you will see why I was so pissed at skipping Florida since "it wasn't worth it because of delegate math" or "it cost too much to get delegates there".

 

[tbone717]

It is important to win states, but assuming that Gingrich or Santorum will drop out and endorse Romney is just guessing at this point. It could end up being a brokered convention.

If one candidate gets a majority of the delegates before then, then fair credit to them. But until then, we ain't seen nothing yet.

Given a situation where that all four candidates stay in the end, on the first ballot there will be bound and unbound delegates. Now let's say that the estimates are that Romney would fall 200 delegates short of being the nominee. It is at that point prior to the first vote that Santorum and/or Newt can go to their unbound delegates (that is the people they know that are supporting them) and ask them to support Romney instead of themselves. The first ballot is read, Romney wins and they drop the confetti and balloons.

 

[thelaibon]

When the national convention happens in Tampa, Ron Paul supporters will be delegates for Mitt Romney, Newt and Rick. They will go to the national convention and if they are bound delegates, they will vote for who ever won the State. However if the final total of votes does not reach 1144 for 1 candidate, in most cases delegates are free to change their vote. That is why Ron Paul supporters are becoming delegates for other candidates.

Is this what is referred to as the "delegate stealth strategy?" sort of pretending to be delegates for other candidates, only to fool everyone later & support RP?

 

[newbitech]

I have no problem at all. If others are too ignorant to educate them about the process that has been in place for years, that's not my problem.

works both ways. and to be honest, that is the kind of attitude I hear from people who won't support Ron Paul because his ideas would put them at a disadvantage. So really, if I told you that your voice doesn't matter, your vote doesn't count, can I expect you to not throw a hissy fit when the government taxes your taxes, drafts you in to the next war, and devalues your currency so that you can't afford to live on one income?

Cause that is what happens when people have no voice and no vote.

Let's be clear, we are talking about changing the role of government in this country. That isn't going to happen if 75-80% of the people are perfectly fine with the role and possibly want to expand it.

 

[tbone717]

Is this what is referred to as the "delegate stealth strategy?" sort of pretending to be delegates for other candidates, only to fool everyone later & support RP?

Yes. But the other candidates also have people running for delegate. A lot of times those people are well know in their community - local committeemen, township supervisors, etc. So even though we may be able to get some Paul supporters in as delegates for Romney, the chance of the convention going to a second ballot are very very very slim.

 

[69360]

maybe now you will see why I was so pissed at skipping Florida since "it wasn't worth it because of delegate math" or "it cost too much to get delegates there".

No, the results would have been the same, the campaign just would have went broke.

 

[robertwerden]

In 2008 McCain won the nomination by getting enough delegates. This time around due to the way the delegates are awarded, a national convention where no one has enough delegates is what we are shooting for. If someone wins the 1144 before Tampa, then there is no way the media will report the brokered convention fairly. They would label us as insurgent and getting the nomination would be impossible.
However if the national convention comes and no one has 1144, then the media will prepare the viewing public about the rules and the country will watch the multiple rounds of voting as if it was a reality tv show, which is exactly what we want to happen. When Ron Paul wins on the second round of voting, the American public will have already be educated on how the delegate process really works and will accept the final vote and chalk it up to a lesson learned in not paying enough attention to the rules that we used to our advantage.

 

[klamath]

So you would not have accepted George W. Bush and many other Presidents then? Because they lost the popular vote but won the electoral college, which is what counts.

We are a Republic, not a Democracy. The system is designed this way for a good reason, to prevent the establishment from thwarting the will of the people through money and mainstream media. I'd say our founding fathers were pretty smart.

It would also not be "deception", because we would be playing the game by the rules.

Do you realize how hypocritical that that I bolded is? Here you have the will of the people by 82% against RP and you want the delegate to sneak in and give the election to him?
If RP was only .5 to 5% percent behind in popular vote then it is close enough to go either way. Would you accept and be happy if rp won the nomination and went on the win the popular vote by 65 to 35%, all the states and then you find out the slate of electors were really Obama supporters and gave him the win? Electors are not bound you know. This would be legal.

 

[Travlyr]

Is this what is referred to as the "delegate stealth strategy?" sort of pretending to be delegates for other candidates, only to fool everyone later & support RP?

No. Not in our caucus anyway. There was a straw vote (Ron Paul won btw), precinct delegates were elected to go to the county assembly, at the county assembly delegates will be elected to go the the State Assembly, and State delegates will be elected at that time. No delegates are yet bound... perhaps a few across the State are, but at least in our county ... that's the way I understand it.

 

[klamath]

That makes no sense and i hope that was a joke considering how long you've been a member. So your saying it's Ron Paul's fault that his supporters are smarter then most people and go out of their way to run as delegate because that's how the system works?

Because RP will not change his presentation to get vote but he would be ok with standing up and saying "I accept the nomination" knowing full well that the delegaes that just voted him in lied through their teeth ot get there. No I would not vote for RP then.

 

[newbitech]

No, the results would have been the same, the campaign just would have went broke.

as opposed to the results being the same and the campaign being broke now?

As I see it, the campaign spending has not influenced this election AT ALL. Why? Because the money was apparently spent trying to run a strategy that didn't require spending money, or at least the kind of money that his been burnt up.

It wasn't so much that the money wasn't spent here, it was the fact that the campaign wasn't even willing to open an office or hold rallies or *GASP* fundraising in one of the TOP THREE donating states to the campaign in the country. 117k Ron Paul supporters. If only 10% donated $10 dollars for the purpose of opening 10 campaign offices, you have an office in all 10 of the major metro areas with a 11.7k budget minus cost of renting the office and staff for a month. That would have made a HUGE difference.

In fact, I THOUGHT that is what campaigns do. Nope, no delegates, NO CAMPAIGN. uuggghh..