Doug Wead Live At 9:00pm EST Via Facebook [Official Thread]

Doug Wead: "[Can Ron Paul be nominated] from he floor? Nope. Not according to the rules that are now in play."

I'm guessing this involves the signature/forms, and some combination of impossible feats that need to happen for them to be accepted.
 
I like Doug too, but not if he's throwing us under the bus. I'm getting tired of their crap.

Doug, Trygve, John, Jaack, Jesse - you fired. It's that simple.
 
I like Doug too, but not if he's throwing us under the bus. I'm getting tired of their crap.

Doug, Trygve, John, Jaack, Jesse - you fired. It's that simple.
\

Doug's facts, even when they have been facts we liked, have not always been accurate in his blog, I know that. We are watching this closely and are hearing from delegates. Our information is as direct as his on many things, although we are hearing from different sources.
 
I like Doug too, but not if he's throwing us under the bus. I'm getting tired of their crap.

Doug, Trygve, John, Jaack, Jesse - you fired. It's that simple.

Before we do that, let's find out what actually happened. You know, like our government should have before starting to bomb everyone after 9-11.
 
"Not according to the rules that are now in play."

WTFH is he talking about? What rules changes? Kindly explain this please.

Screw them, if they want give up, let them. We go for five states on the floor no matter what Monday. If we don't get it, we don't get it but at least we tried dammit instead of meekly accepting our fate.

Sellouts got to sell out I guess. Fine. You go right ahead. Oh by the way, the grassroots fires your ass.

I think there was something about having to get all the delegates signatures in order to do a nomination? They tried to increase the number of states needed, and that got shot down, but there was something about signatures that passed as a rule change.

-t
 
\

Doug's facts, even when they have been facts we liked, have not always been accurate in his blog, I know that. We are watching this closely and are hearing from delegates. Our information is as direct as his on many things, although we are hearing from different sources.

Are you implying that he is intentionally lying to us?
 
"'m guessing this involves the signature/forms, and some combination of impossible feats that need to happen for them to be accepted."

BS. The whole Louisiana deal came down yesterday and only today did they change things to get their written permission. Wonderful. That doesn't change anything. These "official" assholes are giving every excuse in the book to give up.

Fine. You give up. We fight on. Thank God for Tweed in Maine. No deals. They can kick us out if they want to and then they can accept the consequences for it.
 
I think there was something about having to get all the delegates signatures in order to do a nomination? They tried to increase the number of states needed, and that got shot down, but there was something about signatures that passed as a rule change.

-t

Perhaps the delegation chair must sign off on it. If that is the case, we may have problems in a state like Oregon.
 
Are you implying that he is intentionally lying to us?

actually that wasn't what I was thinking, I was thinking he gets in mind sets and wings it on the facts, assuming they are as he assumes they are. I think he has been looking past this campaign for some time, though.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the delegation chair must sign off on it. If that is the case, we may have problems in a state like Oregon.

Our people need to get the signatures of the majority of delegates "One of twenty eight delegates..... to Fifteen of twenty eight delegates' and send it to the media, to us to post and pass around, and to the delegate chair. Then at least he'll have to explain why he isn't accurately reflecting the state. But I agree that is a big issue and nasty.
 
" If that is the case, we may have problems in a state like Oregon"

Or Maine if Mr. Charlie is the delegate chairman.
 
Our people need to get the signatures of the majority of delegates "One of twenty eight delegates..... to Fifteen of twenty eight delegates' and send it to the media, to us to post and pass around, and to the delegate chair. Then at least he'll have to explain why he isn't accurately reflecting the state. But I agree that is a big issue and nasty.

And of each delegate, confirmation by signature by 3 blood relatives who are required to be residents of the same state.
 
" If that is the case, we may have problems in a state like Oregon"

Or Maine if Mr. Charlie is the delegate chairman.

I don't believe he is. He WANTED to be. But Maine hasn't even been seated yet. Watch them seat them then make Charlie delegate chair and require a delegate chair signature.

We'd make sure it got out, mind you, all the way until november.

If they screw Ron out of his duly elected 5+ states, I really really hope he gets the matching funds and runs third party.
 
What about that RICO case the lawyer was going to file?

-t

If he files it right about now and we did a media blits - talk shows, letters to the editor, press releases, showing up in front of camera's w/ signs, etc. It could change things..

We are riding the crest of a media wave on GOP corruption right now - We need the case filed before Tampa. Name Romney and all the heads of the GOP as defendants.

-t
 
Last edited:
I don't believe he is. He WANTED to be. But Maine hasn't even been seated yet. Watch them seat them then make Charlie delegate chair and require a delegate chair signature.

We'd make sure it got out, mind you, all the way until november.

If they screw Ron out of his duly elected 5+ states, I really really hope he gets the matching funds and runs third party.

Not going to happen.
 
actually that wasn't what I was thinking, I was thinking he gets in mind sets and wings it on the facts, assuming they are as he assumes they are. I think he has been looking past this campaign for some time, though.

Reminds me of some other people.
 
Ask him for me, please, why they made that deal for the 17 delegates in Louisiana.

Because this is about Rand Paul, not Ron Paul. Move on to 2016, when Rand gets steamrolled by the GOP and RNC once again. Making his endorsement of Mitt look even more awesome.
 
Back
Top