Maine Legislator Turncoat

[TrishW]

The RNC has called the race. To 99% of republicans, including probably 80% of RP supporters, that is enough to acknowledge Mitt has won.

Sorry my friend, but you are wrong again. The race has not been called! There are primaries still on schedule.

If the race were over, there would be no reason for this conversation, and arm twisting techniques being used.

 

[sailingaway]

Sorry my friend, but you are wrong again. The race has not been called! There are primaries still on schedule.

If the race were over, there would be no reason for this conversation, and arm twisting techniques being used.

The RNC almost certainly broke its rules to call the race 'presumed nominee' as doubtless will come out in the wash. And why would they have to so break their rules when Romney doesn't even have the delegates yet to win, if they didn't think there was a risk?

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

My question to you is, if Rand endorses Romney in the general, will you still support him?

If Rand supports Romney for the republican nomination, the answer is NO. That's what we are talking about here.

If he supports Romney in the general, I will consider him a regular republican. (and less worthy of my support)

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

But is he not every bit as valuable if he is a consistent voice against NDAA and the Patriot Act? If he were to make in into congress and cast those votes against things like that, will the votes be tainted because he endorsed Romney? Of course not.

He could do those things without endorsing Romney. Especially at a critical and timed moment.

 

[mosquitobite]

He could do those things without endorsing Romney. Especially at a critical and timed moment.

Yep!

 

[sailingaway]

He could do those things without endorsing Romney. Especially at a critical and timed moment.

this. If he caves to pressure I want someone better.

 

[WilliamC]

Are we compiling a list of the traitors?

Didn't Nixon do that once?

I'm sure most all of them do.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

If you still believe we can win the nomination you are completely delusional.

 

[Eisenhower]

how can you support someone that you are completely unlike? if rand or ron endorse romney, it's like a democrat endorsing romney (and their stances on things actually arent that far off, lol)

 

[Eisenhower]

If you still believe we can win the nomination you are completely delusional.

requesting ban

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I have an idea...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ropose-a-subsection-to-target-reps-for-defeat

If it is viable to get rid of this guy, let's let him be the first. Hatch is my second choice, but I bet you guys may have better ideas. Rubio is an astroturf person I'd like to get rid of as well, but that will be awhile.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

requesting ban

I request Rocco gets an award. Without his staunch defense, this could have been a 10 post thread and gone unnoticed by most of us. Fakes and liars need to go, and we need to be aware of them.

 

[Anti Federalist]

What I meant was not will you support Romney, my question was will you still support Rand?

No.

I understand political realities, he doesn't have to actively denounce Romney or bash him in the press.

But an open, unqualified endorsement based on "rallying the troops to beat Obama" or some such nonsense, and yes, that would end any active support of Rand by me.

 

[parocks]

Rocco is making some reasonable points here.

In 2008, as the chances of Ron Paul winning approached zero, many people who were on rpf stopped coming here as often, and the voices that remained were those who didn't really see the point of thinking too much about the chances of Ron Paul winning.

Rocco should probably not use "zero" in his assessment of Ron Paul's chances of victory in Tampa.

The fact is, though, that Rocco is closer to being "right" than everyone else is.

And we really shouldn't be shouting down rational people. We shout down rational people a lot. And I'm not all that interested in seeing April 2012s attacking 2010s or 2007s.

No One But Paul is the exact message that Obama would use. Where were the April 2012s in March 2012?

We need delegates in Tampa. And No One But Paul isn't the only message that's going to get delegates in Tampa, and actually, No One But Paul is a message that will turn off many potential voters.

Could try "eh, I like Palin, and the only way to get Palin is to stop Romney." Might want a diverse set of attitudes toward Ron Paul, a number of different, reasonable attitudes that lead to voting for Ron Paul in a primary, at a state convention, or in Tampa.

The idea that we will want to destroy someone who is a soft supporter, who is not the hardest of the hard core supporters is exactly the kind of thing that will prevent people from getting in bed with us in the first place.

We need to bring soft supporters on board.

 

[Badger Paul]

How about this Rocco, we'll endorse Romney when he gets rid all of his foreign policies advisers (not just the gay ones) and adopts the Paul foreign policy platform including calling for the immediate withdrawl of all U.S. forces from Afghanistan and from NATO. He can endorse this plan just like he endorsed the Ryan budget. To me that's more important than any cabinet post or vice presidential slot. Oh yes, Marco Rubio can never be considered for vice-president. He does all that, we'll be more than happy to support him because then I'll know Mr. Etch-A-Sketch candidate will have drawn himself into Ron Paul when it came to the essential part of Paul's campaign.

 

[J_White]

thats a good reason, right there.

he probabley got paid or assured a certain political position.

 

[Occam's Banana]

I guess this actually gets at my entire point, is this a turn against Ron Paul? I mean, technically yes

Technical? What are you talking about? What, pray tell, is the difference between a "technical" betrayal and a "non-technical" betrayal?

And why should either be considered OK?

If you still believe we can win the nomination you are completely delusional.

The RNC has called the race. To 99% of republicans, including probably 80% of RP supporters, that is enough to acknowledge Mitt has won.

the intent was not to turn against Ron Paul but to try to unify the GOP to defeat Obama.

OK. Sure. It's a done deal. All wrapped up. There's nothing left but the official coronation in Tampa.

So riddle me this: if it's all over except for the shouting, then why the hell is there any need to "unify the GOP?"

According to you, it's *already* "unified" to the tune of 99% of Republicans and 80% of Ron Paul supporters. (Those are utterly ludicrous figures, BTW, but .... nevermind.)

You can't have it both ways. So which is it?

He supported Ron Paul literally until the RNC called it for Romney. If Paul still had a chance to win the nomination I'm sure he'd still be with us. What he has not done is turned against the message. To say that withdrawing support from one candidate is withdrawing support from the entire message is cult of personality stuff.

Oh, what a buch of hooey! Mitt Romney is as thouroughly and utterly status quo as they come. He embodies & exemplifies the *exact opposite* of "the entire message" that Ron Paul represents.

Given this fact, withdrawing support for Ron Paul in order to give it to Mitt Romney *IS* "withdrawing support from the entire message."

Again, you can't have it both ways. So which is it?

 

[Dogsoldier]

Um...NDAA?Or did he forget about that?

 

[JJ2]

For those who are unaware, Rand already said a long time ago that he will support whoever the Republican nominee is in the general election.

 

[LibertyIn08]

This is on the same level as people whinging about Ron endorsing Lamar Smith and fundraising for him.