Email from campaign : Michigan is far from over

[kpitcher]

....there are still delegates to be won for Ron Paul in Michigan.

You might wonder "how can this be?"

Because, Santorum and Romney won different districts, and when either of them drops out, those delegates are unbound.

We are still waiting to see what the final results are. If you can believe this, the un-official results posted on the Secretary of State website were wrongly added up by the previous decade's Congressional districts!

When I called the Bureau of Elections to find out more, they informed me that the Secretary of State's office "didn't have time" to figure out which precincts were in which district, and the Republican Party was going to have the job of adding up the precinct totals and figuring out who actually won in each district.

Oh, brother!

I can tell you that Santorum won the 1st, 2nd, and 6th districts. I can tell you that Romney had to win somewhere to win the most votes statewide. But delving into Grand Rapids' 3rd district and metro Detroit's many freshly-gerrymandered districts is going to take a long, long time for the precinct results to be added up.

All we know now is that at least three Congressional districts have delegates up for grabs. (And the possibility of a brokered convention means that really all delegates are still up for grabs.)

So, the race in Michigan is still far from over.

 

[dancjm]

Good stuff

 

[ohgodno]

Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

 

[Darthbrooklyn]

Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ^^THIS

 

[kathy88]

Hand counted ballots at the precinct level is our only option for fair elections. A rep from each candidate on hand to oversee the precinct captains, etc. I'd rather have to wait til the next day or even two days later for accurate results. This instant gratification race to call it is beyond dumb.

 

[economics102]

Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

I guess I'm a little slow but I don't understand what's going on in the picture...?

 

[dvalukis]

I think a candidate needed at least 15% of the popular vote to be eligible for any type of unbound delegates. The 2 that are up for grabs in Michigan and like you said, when someone drops out.

 

[dvalukis]

I guess I'm a little slow but I don't understand what's going on in the picture...?

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

 

[parocks]

Yeah. Well, we lost Michigan. Delegates are confusing, no doubt, and each state has different rules. We didn't win any Congressional Districts, whether it's the old lines or the new lines. Not even close. So, no delegates.

 

[floridasun1983]

....there are still delegates to be won for Ron Paul in Michigan.

You might wonder "how can this be?"

Because, Santorum and Romney won different districts, and when either of them drops out, those delegates are unbound.

Serious question: why would ANYONE think either of them are going to drop out?

 

[Liberty74]

Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

^THIS

 

[Bruno]

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

 

[flightlesskiwi]

If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

this thread needs

NO ONE BUT PAUL!!!!!

 

[Ivash]

Serious question: why would ANYONE think either of them are going to drop out?

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomination. And frankly, in that set of circumstances, they shouldn't. Not just Ron Paul, I mean, but anyone who somehow got enough delegates to win the nomination without winning (or almost winning) the popular vote. It would be undemocratic, and it would guarantee a loss in the general election (since a large segment of the base would revolt and refuse to vote for the nominee).

 

[roversaurus]

If the best we can hope for is a ton of delegates at the convention and being the king maker then, sure a slow delegate accumulation is what we should do... Then we just use those delegates to get ... something. I'm signed up to be a delegate. If I make it in my state there will be an out of pocket expense for it ... I don't really want to spend that money if all we get is a prime time speaking slot. That's worthless. Now, VP that's something.

But we have a chance to WIN ... IF we win Washington. I'd like to spend some resources (and candidate time) on Washington/ND,ID,AK to make the difference between second and first. Than preserve those resources so that we can make a difference between 8% and 15% in one of the later primaries. Because if we don't win a state that's what it's going to be. We will consider ourselves lucky to get 15% in April and May if we don't win one of these next states.

If you don't have optimism, what do you have? Sure, people are donating and working hard to win states. But when that doesn't happen, it comes down to delegates. And the truth is, many of those delegates will be Ron Paul delegates, bound or unbound until a brokerered or open convention, and who knows what will happen.

For the way some people talk, we may as well pack it in, because we haven't won a state, won't get the media push we should have already had from winning a state, and all is lost as we play the delegate game.

Screw that. The fat lady hasn't sung, and we will continue to rack up delegates, stealthily or otherwise, until that time comes.

 

[The Free Hornet]

Grasping at straws... It's true. Many of us on here think WAY too optimistically about delegates and the campaign. It's hard enough to actually win them when we've earned them, let alone trying to get ones we didn't.

As I understand it, there are 2286 people that determine the nominee. The point is to be one of those 2286 or have them convinced Ron Paul is the only one who can beat Obama.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Republican_National_Convention#Delegate_Count

The campaign is working hard on those fronts. I wish I had worked to become a delegate. People trust me.

With a four-way race, this could be a very interesting process. Hearts and minds are about all we have and it seems Ron Paul is kicking ass in that regard. Old-fuddy-duddies that control the GOP may not be in control August 27th 2012.

Added: It is an unbelievable accomplishment that Ron Paul is leading in the "vs Obama" polls. Amazing, Amazing

 

[kathy88]

At (or near) the end of the race one might drop out if the other has a commanding lead.

Edit: Also, if Ron Paul were able to gather enough delegates stealthily to win the nomination without winning a state (or winning only a small handful) then the GOP would never, ever let him take the nomination. And frankly, in that set of circumstances, they shouldn't. Not just Ron Paul, I mean, but anyone who somehow got enough delegates to win the nomination without winning (or almost winning) the popular vote. It would be undemocratic, and it would guarantee a loss in the general election (since a large segment of the base would revolt and refuse to vote for the nominee).

We would be playing by the rules THEY set up.

 

[Feelgood]

Real Talk: Ron needs to win a state.

BAM!!!!

+rep awesome pic

 

[satchelmcqueen]

rules are rules. if paul got the most delegates , i say paul should win.

 

[Scott_in_PA]

I think the only service we will get from the media is on the delegate front.

I noticed the news outlets have begun to talk about the delegate specifics and last night cnn was trying their best to explain how the Michigan delegates would pan out. All the talk of a NEW face, like Jeb or Chris, will do well to sell the public on something unexpected.

If we have the numbers, which is a long shot, we deserve the nomination as well as anyone. Even more so because Ron is an actual contender.