MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT: Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit NOTE: Having the lawsuit not up 4 debate

[No1butPaul]

lol, I love it.

This is what a real Ron Paul supporter sounds like:

PRESIDENT PAUL, PRESIDENT PAUL, PRESIDENT PAUL

Not this: "Drop your case" LOL

 

[sailingaway]

Take a hint, will you? We weren't born yesterday.

this thread isn't for taunting, in either direction.

There is a thread stickied at the top, in posts separated by state, please anyone put what they saw, or saw reported here by eye witnesses at conventions in each state, and we will work that into state statements and check it with state delegates who are forum members, for accuracy.

The point is to be constructive and not be distracted.

 

[LibertyEagle]

This is what a real Ron Paul supporter sounds like:

PRESIDENT PAUL, PRESIDENT PAUL, PRESIDENT PAUL

Not this: "Drop your case" LOL

No, a real one faces facts and does what is necessary to win the case. Not put one's fingers in their ears and hum la la la la or even "PRESIDENT PAUL"....

 

[No1butPaul]

No, a real one faces facts and does what is necessary to win the case. Not put one's fingers in their ears and hum la la la la or "PRESIDENT PAUL"....

I've supported this case from day one ... as I recall you did not. So now your saying I should support this case? That's funny.

Also, have you been following this case and do you realize the reason Mr. Gilbert is filing this case? You do understand his goal, right? He's putting in all his time, energy and passion pro-bono for a reason. Anyone that questions the goal of this case should go back and review. I, for one, have not forgotten. Also, I'm pretty sure Mr. Gilbert has been underestimated ... but that's a good thing.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I've supported this case from day one ... as I recall you did not.

You remember incorrectly. The only thing I wondered about was Gilbert himself.

So now your saying I should support this case? That's funny.

I didn't say anything at all about whether you should support it or not. My comment to you had to do with what you said to lawdida and how you characterized a RP supporter. That is what I disagreed with.

 

[RonRules]

You drop it and refile, with competent attorneys, in the various states where the abuses occurred.

lawdida wants us to conveniently drop the case before Aug. 27, when the coronation will hopefully occur.

 

[RonRules]

So how about that Lopez case?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Board_of_Elections_v._Lopez_Torres

 

[No1butPaul]

You remember incorrectly. The only thing I wondered about was Gilbert himself.

Gilbert and this case are inextricably linked, but whatever.

I didn't say anything at all about whether you should support it or not. My comment to you had to do with what you said to lawdida and how you characterized a RP supporter. That is what I disagreed with.

Just to remind you, the goal of this case is to get a ruling that will allow the delegates to vote their conscience. No, we do not have enough to win with that ruling alone, but there is another component to Mr. Gilbert's strategy with the ultimate goal of Ron Paul becoming the nominee. If anyone feels that is not realistic, then really no reason to support this part of the case ... the fraud/criminal-related elements/RICO is down the road.

 

[sailingaway]

All our goals are different. Mine before convention is primarily that the RNC can't change the rules after all the contests are over, and needs to watch out to be fair with a judge looking over their shoulder in the credentials committee determinations.

And to highlight the fraud and abuse which I damned well think SOMEONE should highlight.

 

[LibertyEagle]

All our goals are different. Mine before convention is primarily that the RNC can't change the rules after all the contests are over, and needs to watch out to be fair with a judge looking over their shoulder in the credentials committee determinations.

And to highlight the fraud and abuse which I damned well think SOMEONE should highlight.

Agreed.

 

[No1butPaul]

All our goals are different. Mine before convention is primarily that the RNC can't change the rules after all the contests are over, and needs to watch out to be fair with a judge looking over their shoulder in the credentials committee determinations.

And to highlight the fraud and abuse which I damned well think SOMEONE should highlight.

Gilbert is pursuing HIS goals though through THIS (HIS) case and that is what I'm supporting. I would think this would be the most appropriate place to support his goals. If my goals differed materially, I would start a new thread. But that's just me.

 

[sailingaway]

Gilbert is pursuing HIS goals though through THIS (HIS) case and that is what I'm supporting. I would think this would be the most appropriate place to support his goals. If my goals differed materially, I would start a new thread. But that's just me.

Yeah, that is just you.

I'm not part of a Gilbert fan club. I support the suit because it is happening and I hope it does good, and I support our delegates who are plaintiffs. However, I even asked about choice of remedies and he sighed and said it was what they had time for before RNC and seemed open to adding more later as they suggest themselves. The complaint does say 'or such further relief as the court in its discretion decides' or words to that effect.

 

[SilenceDewgooder]

Except, you seem to have quickly forgotten that my concern is the damage this bad case brings to the delegates and the movement in general.

Not only is it a bad case, it's bad PR and a record that threatens the chances of getting more delegates seated.

Don't really care for the counter-productive pissing contest that has developed, but I will challenge the statement that the case is bad PR. How is it bad PR when no media is covering it? And I remember a quote that goes something like: "Even bad publicity is good publicity", and to back up that statement, Stanford did a study on it in 2009 and the summary states:

"In a new study from Stanford Graduate School of Business, researchers say in some cases negative publicity can increase sales when a product or company is relatively unknown, simply because it stimulates product awareness."

hmmm.. let me bold this for you: in some cases negative publicity can increase sales when a product or company is relatively unknown, simply because it stimulates product awareness

http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/news/research/sorensen_badnews.html

 

[No1butPaul]

Yeah, that is just you.

Without Ron Paul, I couldn't care less about the RNC.

 

[sailingaway]

Without Ron Paul, I couldn't care less about the RNC.

I added more to my response.

 

[No1butPaul]

Yeah, that is just you.

I'm not part of a Gilbert fan club. I support the suit because it is happening and I hope it does good, and I support our delegates who are plaintiffs. However, I even asked about choice of remedies and he sighed and said it was what they had time for before RNC and seemed open to adding more later as they suggest themselves. The complaint does say 'or such further relief as the court in its discretion decides' or words to that effect.

Question - if my goals differed materially and I didn't start a new thread, wouldn't you, as the moderator, just move my thread? Tell the truth.

 

[sailingaway]

Question - if my goals differed materially and I didn't start a new thread, wouldn't you, as the moderator, just move my thread? Tell the truth.

at this point with all the crap in here? hardly. I am speaking of my goals of why I am sending info to Gilbert to help his case. I see side benefits to the ANCILLARY REMEDIES HE HAS IN FACT REQUESTED. That one part of his request is more compelling to me than another doesn't make it outside the topic of the entirety of the case.

 

[No1butPaul]

at this point with all the crap in here? hardly. I am speaking of my goals of why I am sending info to Gilbert to help his case. I see side benefits to the ANCILLARY REMEDIES HE HAS IN FACT REQUESTED. That one part of his request is more compelling to me than another doesn't make it outside the topic of the entirety of the case.

Yet I'm a distraction for supporting Gilbert's case for the exact reasons he has put it forth, i.e., for saying President Paul in the Ron Paul Forum? I don't know, it just seems hypocritical to attack someone for supporting the case based on the rational behind the filing of the case. I applaud Mr. Gilbert for what he is doing to help fight for the soul of this country and it doesn't bother me that he's not polished. If I wanted polished, I'd support Obama or Romney -- they are finely polished.

 

[sailingaway]

Yet I'm a distraction for supporting Gilbert's case for the exact reasons he has put it forth, i.e., for saying President Paul in the Ron Paul Forum? I don't know, it just seems hypocritical to attack someone for supporting the case based on the rational behind the filing of the case. I applaud Mr. Gilbert for what he is doing to help fight for the soul of this country and it doesn't bother me that he's not polished. If I wanted polished, I'd support Obama or Romney -- they are finely polished.

I was hoping this could be a constructive tactical thread, neither cheerleading nor complaining about the suit but accepting that it IS going forward and trying to make it better.

 

[lawdida]

I don't know.