For Bradley in DC and anyone that wants to understand the truth of the delegate proce

[szczebrzeszyn]

This is the internet, you can travel with a laptop. I don't understand your reasoning.

Or user TOR and similar software that would make IP logging at sites like this useless (in terms of 'geo-ip')

 

[LibertyIn08]

Or user TOR and similar software that would make IP logging at sites like this useless (in terms of 'geo-ip')

Why would someone legitimate feel the need to spoof their IP in the first place?

Not to mention his support bases are all very close, both on this forum and other chat rooms.

 

[constituent]

The story keeps changing. You're now an "international man of mystery" apparently.

/\ dr. steve, is that you?

 

[Drsteveparent]

The point is no one can seem to authenticate you. Lots of people have talked to you on the phone, but no one has met you. I have been watching since the beginning of Steve Parent'ness on the board, and I am sorry but I don't buy it, not one bit. Even in this thread you start advocating the greenpapers website after it was mentioned that to get real information in one of your threads where people tried to clarify where you were wrong. Frankly I am glad you are learning and pointing to more credible sources of information.

I listened to that Ryan in Colorado guy point out to you that you were using realclearpolitics or some other garbage site to get your information, you denied it and pointed to the RNC National Convention website when the subject at hand was State Conventions. I am sure you have the audio of it so hopefully you can post it.

And then when asked where you lived, you said Florida. The following question was what are the rules like there, and you completely punted.

Steve I tried and tried to discount the naysayers, because you do talk a good game in motivating people. I've cited that each time I've posted on your threads. But you are not a credible source of information regarding delegate information as was previously conveyed on your daily paul posts. I've watched your storyline evolve from the beginning where you cited no sources, to citing the RNC National Convention rules, to just saying that you advocate people look up their own state specific rules.

The story keeps changing. You're now an "international man of mystery" apparently.

I am sorry, but for all the crazy stuff I've been forced to pay attention to on this board due to being a Moderator, I have zero faith in your credibility. You seem like yet another well-spoken person seeking out attention.

I hope you continue to motivate people to seek out state specific rules.

I have added links as i had time just tell me what you claim is false and i will gladly answer to you but other people i refuse to answer for it is obvious they have no desire to do anything.

Mdh has made it clear Ron Paul will not win the nomination why should i bother answering anyone like that?

If you asking me every rule about every state i have made it clear i can not possaibly cover every county and every state and that would be a lie if i said anything different even my articles say MOST STATES and as people give me the information on their state and their bylaws i help them the best i can with the information i have.

I just refuse to argue with the same people over and over that have all claimed either it is good for a democrat to be in the white house or that Ron Paul can't win it is a waste of time and i will not even entertain that thought.

Ryan in CO has since retracted his comments on me and he has stated he agrees with 90% of eveything i have said now.

 

[LibertyIn08]

I have added links as i had time just tell me what you claim is false and i will gladly answer to you but other people i refuse to answer for it is obvious they have no desire to do anything.

Mdh has made it clear Ron Paul will not win the nomination why should i bother answering anyone like that?

If you asking me every rule about every state i have made it clear i can not possaibly cover every county and every state and that would be a lie if i said anything different even my articles say MOST STATES and as people give me the information on their state and their bylaws i help them the best i can with the information i have.

I just refuse to argue with the same people over and over that have all claimed either it is good for a democrat to be in the white house or that Ron Paul can't win it is a waste of time and i will not even entertain that thought.

Ryan in CO has since retracted his comments on me and he has stated he agrees with 90% of eveything i have said now.

So you admit you gave out false information and mislead people as to Ron Paul's chances?

 

[Drsteveparent]

The point is no one can seem to authenticate you. Lots of people have talked to you on the phone, but no one has met you. I have been watching since the beginning of Steve Parent'ness on the board, and I am sorry but I don't buy it, not one bit. Even in this thread you start advocating the greenpapers website after it was mentioned that to get real information in one of your threads where people tried to clarify where you were wrong. Frankly I am glad you are learning and pointing to more credible sources of information.

I listened to that Ryan in Colorado guy point out to you that you were using realclearpolitics or some other garbage site to get your information, you denied it and pointed to the RNC National Convention website when the subject at hand was State Conventions. I am sure you have the audio of it so hopefully you can post it.

And then when asked where you lived, you said Florida. The following question was what are the rules like there, and you completely punted.

Steve I tried and tried to discount the naysayers, because you do talk a good game in motivating people. I've cited that each time I've posted on your threads. But you are not a credible source of information regarding delegate information as was previously conveyed on your daily paul posts. I've watched your storyline evolve from the beginning where you cited no sources, to citing the RNC National Convention rules, to just saying that you advocate people look up their own state specific rules.

The story keeps changing. You're now an "international man of mystery" apparently.

I am sorry, but for all the crazy stuff I've been forced to pay attention to on this board due to being a Moderator, I have zero faith in your credibility. You seem like yet another well-spoken person seeking out attention.

I hope you continue to motivate people to seek out state specific rules.

Yes you have pegged it i am an attention seeker.

Let me ask you this do you know ray from ronpaulradio.com are rayzer?

Why don't you ask him about me i have spoken to him and his group on several occasions.

Why not speak to the people from www.rprradio.com and see where they reseqarched my information and then asked me back because i was correct.

How about you asked the meetup groups from WA, GA, OK, NV, TX, LA, OR, FL, CA, and so on and ask them if i gave them false information instead of listening to 5 people here that clearly are wrong or twist what i have said or are confused about the way the rules read.

Then maybe we can get beyond this i will tell you what email me at [email protected] and give me your phone number and i will call you personally and end all doubt.

 

[Drsteveparent]

So you admit you gave out false information and mislead people as to Ron Paul's chances?

I said no such thing.

 

[Cowlesy]

I have added links as i had time just tell me what you claim is false and i will gladly answer to you but other people i refuse to answer for it is obvious they have no desire to do anything.

I didn't claim anything is false. I claimed when put on the spot, you could not cite any of the rules/guidelines for the state you are purportedly from. That's all.

Mdh has made it clear Ron Paul will not win the nomination why should i bother answering anyone like that?

I wouldn't answer that question either. Please be honest, that's not his only question.

If you asking me every rule about every state i have made it clear i can not possaibly cover every county and every state and that would be a lie if i said anything different even my articles say MOST STATES and as people give me the information on their state and their bylaws i help them the best i can with the information i have.

Good. Continue to make that clear. It's a big improvement from the start of this saga.

I just refuse to argue with the same people over and over that have all claimed either it is good for a democrat to be in the white house or that Ron Paul can't win it is a waste of time and i will not even entertain that thought.

People who claim it would be good to get a Democrat in the White House -- can you quote anyone on this board who says that? If so, I'd be with you in giving them a tall, cool glass of Shut the Hell Up.

Ron Paul CAN win, if John McCain completely implodes. The purpose that most of us are cheerleading so hard for the delegate process is to get more Ron Paul supporters to be active Republicans, to learn the process itself and if by a stroke of luck McCain drops out, we'll be ready to raise our voices. No one should have the illusion that if things continue as they have been, that we can mount any sort of delegate takeover at the National Convention. People who point to that sentiment and call those people defeatists, are idiots.

Ryan in CO has since retracted his comments on me and he has stated he agrees with 90% of eveything i have said now.

Can you cite evidence?

 

[Bradley in DC]

People here defending you and bradley saying it's over and Ron Paul will not be president isn't discouragment?

That's rich mdh.

Steve,

If you would please stop saying I say things I don't, you wouldn't look quite the fool and it'd be easier for us to work together to put out all of the right information:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=128018

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1387327#poststop

 

[LibertyIn08]

Steve,

If you would please stop saying I say things I don't, you wouldn't look quite the fool and it'd be easier for us to work together to put out all of the right information:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=128018

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1387327#poststop

Many of us defeatists, as your supporters call us, SGP, have been working hard to get as many people as delegates as possible.

However, we do not spill out platitudes about a convention takeover or McCain not having enough to clinch. Rather, we approach this as both a short-term and long-term development.

 

[Cowlesy]

Dr. Steve --- In this post below, you cite you will discuss the delegate process in detail.

As I am sure many of you are aware, there is still a chance for Ron Paul to win the GOP nomination at the National Convention.

If you are a precinct leader or a member of a Ron Paul meet-up group and do not understand the delegate process, please contact Dr Steve Parent (SGP) of the Daily Paul Forum who is willing to hold conference calls with your group and explain the delegate process in detail with you.

You can contact Dr. Steve Parent (SGP) at the following e-mail address. [email protected]

Don't delay, contact Dr. Steve Parent today.

So based on your message above, did you mean the national delegate process, or a state specific process?

Thanks.

 

[Cowlesy]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=114305&highlight=Dr.+Steve+Parent

Quit freaking out!
There is a plan, NO 3rd PARTY!!!!
By LK | February 6, 2008


PEOPLE PLEASE READ THIS SO YOU CAN
UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN WIN THE NOMINATION AND STOP LISTENING TO THE MSM FOR YOUR INFO!

Posted February 6th, 2008 by SGPI hope someone will put this on the front page so it doesn’t get lost.

I know many of you are bummed about yesterday BUT THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE ELECTION SYSTEM WORKS : Let me explain to you the reality of how to become the nominee.


First stop looking at who wins each states popular vote for most of these states the vote by the people is really nothing but a straw poll and have no real bearing on who will become the nominee. The only way this matters is if 1 person receives 1192 delegates that are bound by state rules to be commited to that candidate. NOW there is no possible way that anyone in the race can achieve this goal now because of the major split in state wins by the candidates.

So what happens now you ask? You look at the number of delegates that Dr. Paul has that are uncommited to the other candidates and will support him. these delegates are not decided by the popular vote ie: straw poll of the people. Since no one will have enough delegates to skate them through to the nomination we now must look at how many delegates NOT VOTES but delegates Dr. Paul has that are 100% uncommited to the other candidates and will be 100% for Dr. Paul and are free to vote for whom they wish.

This race will go all the way to the convention for there is no other way for someone to receive the nomintaion untill the convention.

The RNC will convene its annual Winter Meeting - and voters will continue to cast their ballots in the nation’s primaries and caucuses. Candidates for delegate and alternate delegate to the convention will be elected - and thousands of convention participants and guests will begin planning their trips to Minneapolis-Saint Paul The first week in September 2008

SO WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN?

This means that all of the people that registered to become a deligate for Dr. Paul can go to the convention and cast thier vote for Dr. Paul, now think about what i just said : Do you think for one second that all the people that voted for Dr. Paul and filed to become a deligate will not show up at the convention to vote for the good Doctor? Of course they will just like they battled the rain and the sleet and the 15 below zero winter weather to knock on doors and wave signs spreading our message.

Now i assure you that even though we didn’t win the popular vote in many states WE DID PICK UP THE MAJORITY OF DELEGATES THAN ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES IN MOST EVERY STATE EXCEPT A FEW. So yes they won the straw poll and we won what counts which is delegates.

Doesn’t Dr. Paul need to WIN 5 states to be on the ballot at the convention for the nomination?

NO THIS IS NOT TRUE for people were just confused on how it actually works.

We only need the majority of delegates from 5 states to be put on the ballot NOT THE POPULAR VOTE OF 5 STATES and i assure you we have picked up the majority of uncommitted delegates for Dr. Paul in more than 5 states.

Do any of you remember seeing posts by myself and many others that said BECOME A DELEGATE? There is still time in most states to become a delegate for the convention and we are picking up more of them every day.

So please STOP you worry too much because you do not understand how the election system works and you thought we lost didn’t you?

The fact is Dr. Paul is a genius in his strategy and we are further ahead in delegates than you think and we can win the nomination.

I hope this gives a better understanding of how we have been winning even though most of you thought we were not.

NOW LET’S KEEP WORKING!

Dr. Steve Parent

Dr. Steve --- do you see the post above? I highlighted the areas that are complete follies.

 

[No1ButPaul08]

People who claim it would be good to get a Democrat in the White House -- can you quote anyone on this board who says that? If so, I'd be with you in giving them a tall, cool glass of Shut the Hell Up.

He's going to said I did, but I did not. What I said was,

"What I think to be the most important, is keeping McCain out of the White House. We absolutely need to have GOP nomination open in 2012. Also, putting a Dem in the White House will wake conservatives up."

This is strictly in a McCain vs Dem match up. Now reasonable minds can certainly differ on who they prefer, but one can certainly have an opinion on the match up. I prefer a Dem for the reasons stated. If McCain is in the WH the GOP nomination could be locked up for 8-16 years, something certainly not preferable to us. I don't think any result of this election is going to be, "good."

For this, he refuses to answer my questions labeling me "ignorant"

 

[mdh]

Steve I tried and tried to discount the naysayers, because you do talk a good game in motivating people. I've cited that each time I've posted on your threads. But you are not a credible source of information regarding delegate information as was previously conveyed on your daily paul posts. I've watched your storyline evolve from the beginning where you cited no sources, to citing the RNC National Convention rules, to just saying that you advocate people look up their own state specific rules.

I've been advocating this for close to a year. I also learned the stuff in WV and subsequently Ron Paul is the only candidate still in the race who has national delegates from WV so far. We would not have had the turnout to create that bargaining power if I hadn't spend quite a bit of time holding peoples' hands while they filled out paperwork, and that's a simple fact. Yet it seems that despite that, those who rise to prominence are often people who advocate nationwide efforts. With the mess of different rules and laws that vary widely from state to state, I see anything at a higher-than-state level as being suspect - if peoples' intent was simply to have an impact, why not learn their own state really really well and then try to do well there? Why march onto the national stage when it's clear that there ain't enough time in a lifetime for one person to adequately research and then explain in laymens terms the governing rules and laws for every state plus territory? Much less to keep up with changes (WV changed some rules in September, when we had deadlines in September... fun stuff!)

 

[Cowlesy]

He's going to said I did, but I did not. What I said was,

"What I think to be the most important, is keeping McCain out of the White House. We absolutely need to have GOP nomination open in 2012. Also, putting a Dem in the White House will wake conservatives up."

This is strictly in a McCain vs Dem match up. Now reasonable minds can certainly differ on who they prefer, but one can certainly have an opinion on the match up. I prefer a Dem for the reasons stated. If McCain is in the WH the GOP nomination could be locked up for 8-16 years, something certainly not preferable to us. I don't think any result of this election is going to be, "good."

For this, he refuses to answer my questions labeling me "ignorant"

Yeah I think we're boned either way. We'll go into debt faster with McCain, and our taxes will skyrocket with Obama. If a Dem wins the White House, it's going to be on us to smack our fellow conservatives around to try them to realize what a ridiculous mistake it was to nominate McCain.

Let's just keep our fingers crossed he drops out for some reason between now and then, and we do everything humanly possible to get Dr. Paul on center stage. Either way, we all need to be relentless in securing more positions in the Republican Party and keeping our supporters active in the Party. On that note I'm off to the gym, and then am going to watch my DVD that just came in the mail, directed by and starring a Mr. Aaron Russo

 

[MelissaWV]

Some general statements to mull over:

I do no good to advertise one thing, and be another. I do no good to diminish someone's efforts, no matter how I am treated, or who they are. I do even less good to let pass, without question, their factual inaccuracies and their behavioral inconsistencies. I meddle at my own peril: upping my post count at the expense of dignity and the movement, picking at people because I must marginalize them by calling them a puppet or a dummy account. I harm my cause by simply begging for trust instead of providing citations, and bringing others into the argument who are not here to tell their side.

If I twist the truth to suit me, and discard its shell when it doesn't fit my needs, then I am a disservice to those I choose to educate. My time is precious, and my ego does not need feeding. I should be an enforcer of truth to the best of my abilities. I should admit my faults and seek to rectify what I have done wrong. I should attempt to walk a mile in my "opponent's" shoes and wonder if, in fact, they are my enemy. I should be able to walk my path whether there are groupies adoring me, or I am alone. My principles are worth standing up for. I am no greater than another human being unless they seek to place themselves beneath me by petty attacks. I do not elevate myself by participating in same, or by mentioning myself, or by patting myself on the back.

The war is not over and preparing for the worst (but hoping for the best) has truly no downside. I gain nothing by putting down those who choose to prepare in a different way. I should not contradict my own words without an apology or admission that I am wrong on the one hand or another. I should take all this force and focus it towards my goal. I should not assume reasons for something taking place, but only be skeptical of persons whose stories seem false, and whose information is misleading.

I should not discourage others from walking their own path, no matter if it's to folly.

I should realize that unsolicited advice is seldom heeded, and even less seldom appreciated.

Ron Paul can win... what he wins is up to us, and the sum of our individual efforts. Good luck on *your* path.

***And yes a great deal of this applies to me. I wonder if anyone else will get anything out of this. Doubtful, but I feel better!***

 

[walter]

I have a question, I heard that BOUND delegates could opt to simply set out the first round and NOT vote, and come in later when they are unbound, is this true? Does anyone know? Thanks

 

[spacehabitats]

Absolutely awesome Melissa.

Some general statements to mull over:

I do no good to advertise one thing, and be another. I do no good to diminish someone's efforts, no matter how I am treated, or who they are. I do even less good to let pass, without question, their factual inaccuracies and their behavioral inconsistencies. I meddle at my own peril: upping my post count at the expense of dignity and the movement, picking at people because I must marginalize them by calling them a puppet or a dummy account. I harm my cause by simply begging for trust instead of providing citations, and bringing others into the argument who are not here to tell their side.

If I twist the truth to suit me, and discard its shell when it doesn't fit my needs, then I am a disservice to those I choose to educate. My time is precious, and my ego does not need feeding. I should be an enforcer of truth to the best of my abilities. I should admit my faults and seek to rectify what I have done wrong. I should attempt to walk a mile in my "opponent's" shoes and wonder if, in fact, they are my enemy. I should be able to walk my path whether there are groupies adoring me, or I am alone. My principles are worth standing up for. I am no greater than another human being unless they seek to place themselves beneath me by petty attacks. I do not elevate myself by participating in same, or by mentioning myself, or by patting myself on the back.

The war is not over and preparing for the worst (but hoping for the best) has truly no downside. I gain nothing by putting down those who choose to prepare in a different way. I should not contradict my own words without an apology or admission that I am wrong on the one hand or another. I should take all this force and focus it towards my goal. I should not assume reasons for something taking place, but only be skeptical of persons whose stories seem false, and whose information is misleading.

I should not discourage others from walking their own path, no matter if it's to folly.

I should realize that unsolicited advice is seldom heeded, and even less seldom appreciated.

Ron Paul can win... what he wins is up to us, and the sum of our individual efforts. Good luck on *your* path.

***And yes a great deal of this applies to me. I wonder if anyone else will get anything out of this. Doubtful, but I feel better!***

One of the great tragedies of the forum system is that this post (and its wisdom) will languish largely unread in the backwaters of a thread like this.
Kudos for the effort!

 

[Bradley in DC]

Bradley DO YOU NOT SEE THIS?

First stop looking at who wins each states popular vote for most of these states the vote by the people is really nothing but a straw poll and have no real bearing on who will become the nominee. The only way this matters is if 1 person receives 1191 delegates that are bound by state rules to be commited to that candidate

MOST STATES - MOST STATES - MOST STATES- Did i say every state? where did i ever say that as i said it is not my job to right a thesis ON THE ELECTION PROCESS.

Steve,

I have read your posts. I have refuted your posts. I urge you to go to the wiki and we'll clear this all up state by state. Where we agree, where you misunderstand, where you're just flat out wrong.

How about this? Name some states where our votes for president "have no real bearing on who will become the nominee." In the minority of primary states (listed on the wiki and in this thread), it is the only thing. In other states (simplified), it is our votes that pick the state delegates that pick the national nominating convention delegates. Ergo, while it is indirect, our votes DO have "a real bearing on who will become the nominee."

The only way this matters is if 1 person receives 1191 delegates that are bound by state rules to be commited to that candidate

Steve, why do you keep repeated this obviously factually incorrect statement that you recanted on earlier in this thread? Repeating now implies that you are either delusional or a fraud.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1391511

Ok, so let's be clear. When you previously wrote your oft-repeated claim:

I know many of you are bummed about yesterday BUT THAT IS BECAUSE YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE ELECTION SYSTEM WORKS : Let me explain to you the reality of how to become the nominee.

First stop looking at who wins each states popular vote for most of these states the vote by the people is really nothing but a straw poll and have no real bearing on who will become the nominee. The only way this matters is if 1 person receives 1191 delegates that are bound by state rules to be commited to that candidate. So if a candiate like Mccain has 600 delegates now and IF he doesn't reach 1191 WHICH HE WILL NOT most of the delegates the state awarded him mean nothing and keep in mind in most of the states most of the people that represent the 600 for Mccain are actually Ron Paul supporters. NOW there is no possible way that anyone in the race can achieve this goal now because of the major split in state wins by the candidates.​

You either didn't know what you were talking about or were either lying or delusional: As you admit now, votes of bound and unbound delegates count. As you admit now, there IS a possible (and in fact probable) way that McCain will have a majority of delegate support on the first ballot. If you are NOT delusional then you are a charlatan, a fraud. Let's be clear: you admit now that I was right, and you were wrong.

Let's look at your claims in a little more depth:

First stop looking at who wins each states [sic] popular vote for most of these states the vote by the people is really nothing but a straw poll and have no real bearing on who will become the nominee.​

Well, as I point out in greater detail in the wiki, the primary vote is the ONLY factor deciding the (elected) delegates from many states, including California, etc. In addition, the primary vote is the only factor in other states in determining some of the (elected) delegates. In many other states then it is their "straw poll" vote that picks the state convention delegates that pick the national nominating convention delegates (which does in fact have a "real bearing on will become the nominee) and, in addition in many states, a candidate must meet a minimum threshold to be awarded any delegates.

So if a candiate like Mccain has 600 delegates now and IF he doesn't reach 1191 WHICH HE WILL NOT most of the delegates the state awarded him mean nothing​

So, by your reasoning in this explanation to all of us who don't understand how the system works, we should not bother trying to be delegates to the national nominating convention unless Dr. Paul reaches 1191 delegates or we would "mean nothing" according to you. I call shenanigans.

So, it's your word with no specific citations to back up your claim versus others. Wow, that really put everyone in their place. Especially since you are on public record on this post as being outed as either delusional or a charlatan (see above).

 

[Bradley in DC]

I have a question, I heard that BOUND delegates could opt to simply set out the first round and NOT vote, and come in later when they are unbound, is this true? Does anyone know? Thanks

The rules binding delegates (or not) are set by the several states. Sorry, that's the best I got. :o