Did anyone youtube CNN tonight saying Ron Paul might win Nevada?

No idea to be quite honest with you. I hope that is the case, but all I'm saying is the polls in Iowa and NH weren't as drastically off as we had hoped. The only way RP will win is to have huge turnout from his supporters. Something we all hope for.

Don't forget - we mainly need low turnout from the other guys (although our turnout matters, too). When Paul sent the e-mail about the NH recount, he mentioned that we had turnout pegged right around what was expected. The reason we didn't do as well was because other candidates were able to GOTV, too.

That's what gives me hope (granted, it's small, but it's hope nonetheless) about Nevada. This will be the first state where the other candidates have ignored them. Even Michigan had heavy campaigning by McCain and Romney. There's a much better chance of low turnout from the other guys.

And..........if that truly is the biggest factor, we've got Super Tuesday in the bag. No doubt.
 
Don't forget - we mainly need low turnout from the other guys (although our turnout matters, too). When Paul sent the e-mail about the NH recount, he mentioned that we had turnout pegged right around what was expected. The reason we didn't do as well was because other candidates were able to GOTV, too.

That's what gives me hope (granted, it's small, but it's hope nonetheless) about Nevada. This will be the first state where the other candidates have ignored them. Even Michigan had heavy campaigning by McCain and Romney. There's a much better chance of low turnout from the other guys.

And..........if that truly is the biggest factor, we've got Super Tuesday in the bag. No doubt.

Thats a very good point. Here's hoping for an upset!
 
I don't get why Dr. Paul didn't spend more time in Nevada if it has more delegates then South Carolina. I'm glad he at least is running commercials but attending a few rallies and stuff would have made a big difference. Plus Dr. Paul is against banning Internet gambling which I'm sure is a huge issue in Nevada. His pro freedom stance helps the gambling industry.
 
I don't get why Dr. Paul didn't spend more time in Nevada if it has more delegates then South Carolina. I'm glad he at least is running commercials but attending a few rallies and stuff would have made a big difference. Plus Dr. Paul is against banning Internet gambling which I'm sure is a huge issue in Nevada. His pro freedom stance helps the gambling industry.

check this out

http://www.gambling911.com/Ron-Paul-011608B.html
 
I have posted this in other place here but I'd like some thought on this.

I heard from a forum member that they are using handcounting, no diebold. Do you think the AP is saying what it is saying because handcount is much hard to 'cheat'. It seems that the POLLS in NV are as always.. Ron at some stupid low number --- YET, for this state they might concede a win to Ron Paul. That doesn't match the polls. Do you think that there is a correlation between this story and the lack of Diebold - in which items can't be manipulated?

I do admit I am moving into the conspiracy ocean, but I'd like thoughts on this line of reasoning. AND IF you think this is somewhat practical in its line of thought, then wouldn't it be wise to focus on states that use paper ballots (ie, california) and NOT diebold states.
 
It seems to me there is still a general misunderstanding of how a caucus works here...

It would be GREAT to win the popular vote in Nevada, but even if we didn't it's most likely that we will have the most organized group of delegates. If we control the delegates, even if someone else wins the popular vote for the state, we control the state. ;)
 
I have posted this in other place here but I'd like some thought on this.

I heard from a forum member that they are using handcounting, no diebold. Do you think the AP is saying what it is saying because handcount is much hard to 'cheat'. It seems that the POLLS in NV are as always.. Ron at some stupid low number --- YET, for this state they might concede a win to Ron Paul.

That's a very interesting point. If indeed there's no Diebold use in Nevada, then it makes a lot of sense for AP to worry that Ron Paul might win. If he does win it will confirm our worst fears about voted fraud.
 
i started making calls to NV today in coordination with the official campaign. i was very surprised. probably 50% of the people i talked to were RP supporters.

one lady said she was voting for "the Christian guy. Huntington? Hunterbee? Huckerson? Huckla...." after a two-minute conversation, though, she was a convert to Dr Paul.

Bless you son for you have canvassed.
 
Didn't we win the Nevada straw polls as well?


A big issue with Nevada will be that Ron is against taxing tips.


Btw the illegal aliens voting is incredibly illegal and wrong. Anyone involved with that should be shit-canned and thrown in jail. So much for democracy.

Why does Alexa's name say "banned"???
 
Anyone know which show they said this on CNN and roughly what time? I can you tube it if I can find it since I record everything now.
 
That's a very interesting point. If indeed there's no Diebold use in Nevada, then it makes a lot of sense for AP to worry that Ron Paul might win. If he does win it will confirm our worst fears about voted fraud.

I don't deny the possibility of voter fraud and I think we all need to be ultra-cautious, but do not confuse correlation with causation. IF RP wins, we will be in a much better position that we are now, but that doesn't mean that he didn't legitimately come in fourth or fifth in the previous votes. There has been a lot of campaigning and advertising and many people on these boards in those states admit being underwhelmed.
 
Back
Top