Rand Paul is going to win I guarantee it

[Dr. Dog]

Once again without a first place finish among the three you said that Rubio would endorse, they are all dropping out. Rand Paul and Donald Trump will stay in through the primaries and for the reasons I stated above Rand Paul is the lesser of the two evils for the establishment.

Yes. Christie, Jeb, and Kasich will likely drop out after Iowa/NH (perhaps as late as post-S.C and Nevada), and they will likely endorse Rubio. Rubio will be the establishment candidate with the money to go in strong into Super Tuesday and beyond.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

Yes. Christie, Jeb, and Kasich will likely drop out after Iowa/NH (perhaps as late as post-S.C and Nevada), and they will likely endorse Rubio. Rubio will be the establishment candidate with the money to go in strong into Super Tuesday and beyond.

Can you tell us how confident the people are at Ted Cruz Forums?

 

[dude58677]

Yes. Christie, Jeb, and Kasich will likely drop out after Iowa/NH (perhaps as late as post-S.C and Nevada), and they will likely endorse Rubio. Rubio will be the establishment candidate with the money to go in strong into Super Tuesday and beyond.

You really think that Marc Rubio is going to stay in the race as long as Ron Paul did in 2008 and 2012 which was summer?

 

[WTLaw]

I will say this; I didn't think Santorum had a chance this time last time. He just plugged away and almost snuck up.

I also thought McCain was toast in 08 (even though my first assumption was he would be the nominee). All those are good things.

Another note... Rand Paul supporters tend to be smarter. Yay. We will figure out something, eventually. Even if it isn't this election, liberty will come.

 

[LifeLibertyPursuit]

Must have liked that thanksgiving day game. 11-0 strong

Keep Pounding!

Hopefully we will be 1-0 after the Saints game

 

[PaulConventionWV]

He is the type that will drop out without a first place finish in either NH, Iowa, Nevada, and SC. The other candidates will also back Paul because they weren't bullied by Paul.

You keep saying "X because Y" as if it were really that simple. I can't believe anyone is really this naive. You think not being bullied by Paul is going to be enough for them to support him? You have it all worked out perfectly in you head, but that's just because you take the most favorable possibility and ignore all other possible scenarios. Reality's a bitch.

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

Well, when Paul enters double digits, we can consider whether your belief is worth seriously considering.

 

[TheNewYorker]

Rand is definitely going to win it. His whole plan is to poll as low as possible right up until Iowa, and then he will adjust his poll numbers up to about 45% a couple hours before voting starts, and win it. You watch and see.

 

[Dr. Dog]

Rand is definitely going to win it. His whole plan is to poll as low as possible right up until Iowa, and then he will adjust his poll numbers up to about 45% a couple hours before voting starts, and win it. You watch and see.

If the Fed can set interest rates, then there's no reason why Rand can't set his poll numbers.

 

[derek4ever]

I personally don't know how Rand will do. I think he's still holding his poker hand to his chest. Although there's still less than 2 months until Iowa votes, anything can happen. For example, Trump announced and before the end of the month, he was leading! I think, if the polls in IA or NH closed today, the polling says one thing but we have organization! If we can finish in the top 2 or 3 in both Iowa and New Hampshire, that would be a good feat for the future contests. And then we have 14 contests coming up:

South Carolina: Winner-take-all by state and CD

Nevada: Proportional statewide (3% threshold to get delegates)

Alabama: Winner-take-most by state and CD (if a candidate gets 50%+ in either tier, it gets all the delegates from that tier; if not, all candidates getting 20% in either tier qualify for that tier's delegates; if no candidate gets 20% in either tier, all that tier's delegates are allocated proportionally)

Alaska: Proportional statewide (13% threshold to get delegates)

Arkansas: Winner-take-most by state and CD (if a candidate gets 50%+1 in a district, it gets all that district's delegates; if not, the winner gets 2 delegates and the runner-up gets 1; all candidates getting 15%+ of the statewide vote get 1 state delegate and the remaining state delegates are allocated to either the winner if it has 50%+1 of the vote or to the top 3 candidates that passed the 15% threshold)

Georgia: Winner-take-most by state and CD (if a candidate gets 50%+1 in a district, it gets all that district's delegates; if not, the winner gets 2 delegates and the runner-up gets 1 delegate; all candidates getting 20% of the statewide vote qualify for getting state delegates)

Massachusetts: Proportional statewide (5% threshold)

Minnesota: Proportional statewide and CD (10% threshold in both tiers)

Oklahoma: Winner-take-most statewide and CD (50%+a threshold statewide or district to get all delegates; if not, candidates getting 15% qualify for statewide delegates and the district delegates depend on whether 2 candidates pass the 15% threshold (giving the winner 2 and the runner-up 1) or if it's 3 (the top 3 candidates get 1 a piece)

Tennessee: Winner-take-most statewide and CD (2/3 of the vote statewide or district to get all delegates; if not, candidates getting 20% in either tier qualify for that tier's delegates; however, in a district, if no candidate gets 20%, all 3 of the district's delegates are allocated to the top 3, while if no candidate gets 20% statewide, all the delegates are allocated to all candidates getting at least 3% of the vote)

Texas: Same as TN

Vermont: Proportional (Majority trigger if a candidate gets 50%+, if not, all delegates are allocated to candidates getting 20%+, if no candidate reaches 20%, it drops to 15% and then 10%)

Virginia: Winner-take all by CD, Proportional statewide (majority trigger for state delegates if a candidate gets 50%+, if not, the candidates getting 15%+ qualify for delegates)

Wyoming: Proportional straw poll (5% threshold)

My thoughts? Focus on trying to win AK, VT, TN, AR, MN, VA & WY (obviously, every state, but these are my gut feelings as to where Rand can win). I think we'll overperform what the pollsters say and we'll hear some good news.

 

[dude58677]

You keep saying "X because Y" as if it were really that simple. I can't believe anyone is really this naive. You think not being bullied by Paul is going to be enough for them to support him? You have it all worked out perfectly in you head, but that's just because you take the most favorable possibility and ignore all other possible scenarios. Reality's a bitch.

I tried to get everyone fired up...never mind!

Back to low morale!

Sigh...

It's just that no one in politics has endorsed Donald Trump so far and the Paul's historically stayed in the race.

 

[CPUd]

I tried to get everyone fired up...never mind!

Back to low morale!

Sigh...

It's just that no one in politics has endorsed Donald Trump so far and the Paul's historically stayed in the race.

Rand will stay in it as long as he's winning enough delegates to keep other candidates from running away with it. They will have to be bound to Rand, or Rand-supporting unbound delegates. I don't see him running all the way to the RNC like Ron 2012 if he has a lot of supporting delegates bound to a 'presumptive nominee'. With the rule changes, I doubt that will be able to happen anyway. Rand has said he believes it will be a 5-way race by spring.

 

[Feelgood]

Rand is definitely going to win it. His whole plan is to poll as low as possible right up until Iowa, and then he will adjust his poll numbers up to about 45% a couple hours before voting starts, and win it. You watch and see.

Well now I am convinced! If that is Rand's strategy, then he is RIGHT on target!

But what happens if other candidates decide to adjust their poll numbers as well? And we end up with everyone at 45%? I wonder if that would raise any red flags?!

 

[dude58677]

Well now I am convinced! If that is Rand's strategy, then he is RIGHT on target!

But what happens if other candidates decide to adjust their poll numbers as well? And we end up with everyone at 45%? I wonder if that would raise any red flags?!

If everyone listens to you it will be guaranteed that he won't win.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

To quickly repeat and recap, the five leading establishment candidates (Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Christie) already have enough money and endorsements on hand to hang in the primary race through about Super Tuesday. Trump and Carson, as frontrunners (don't believe the hype about Carson collapsing), have enough core base support to stay in through Super Tuesday. This means, with Rand, at least 8 candidates will crowd the field through early spring. This reality will make it hard for Rand to win or place high.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I tried to get everyone fired up...never mind!

Back to low morale!

Sigh...

It's just that no one in politics has endorsed Donald Trump so far and the Paul's historically stayed in the race.

The thing is, it doesn't matter what you do. Ron Paul had plenty of endorsements. If the system doesn't like you, which it's clear they don't like Rand, then you're not going to win, no matter how fired-up you get. I think it's best to take the path to realism.

 

[CPUd]

To quickly repeat and recap, the five leading establishment candidates (Bush, Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Christie) already have enough money and endorsements on hand to hang in the primary race through about Super Tuesday. Trump and Carson, as frontrunners (don't believe the hype about Carson collapsing), have enough core base support to stay in through Super Tuesday. This means, with Rand, at least 8 candidates will crowd the field through early spring. This reality will make it hard for Rand to win or place high.

Trump and Bush won't even be there when they vote in NH. If internal polling for Christie or Kasich doesn't look good they will drop out also. Carson might go for the caucus states, but his supporters don't have the organization or experience to get a significant number of delegates from there.

 

[Feelgood]

If everyone listens to you it will be guaranteed that he won't win.

I honestly don't care if people listen or not. I just wish experience would ground people here enough that they could take a more realistic and pragmatic view of things. People in these forums are quickly approaching batshit crazy. The title of this thread basically proves it. No one can guarantee anything, INCLUDING the fact the sun will even rise tomorrow. Rand Paul is at BEST an extreme longshot to get the nomination. Anyone with an ounce of sense would know that. Doesn't stop me from supporting him, or donating to him or writing him in on election day. Just means I am intelligent enough and wise enough to see things clearly and I understand, as it sits now Rand Paul has a less than 5% chance of getting the nomination.

Ron Paul could raise more money in a SINGLE money bomb then Rand can get in a single quarter! Technically, using the strategy that is guaranteed to help get Rand into the white house, Ron won Iowa. Ron Paul won the national CPAC 2 years in a row. Every reason people are claiming Rand will win, Ron has accomplished and THEN some. Ron Paul stayed in when everyone was so sure there was going to be a brokered convention!

Guess what? No Ron Paul nominee. No Ron Paul POTUS.

Rand is in a far worse position than his father and yet it is guaranteed by this thread he is going to win.

Give me a break.

I still look forward to 2020, hopefully the ophthalmologist runs then and uses the 2020 to his advantage. Only time will tell. Im hopeful the country has gone to shit enough by then, that MAYBE these sheep will wake up and elect a Paul.

 

[CPUd]

I honestly don't care if people listen or not. I just wish experience would ground people here enough that they could take a more realistic and pragmatic view of things. People in these forums are quickly approaching batshit crazy. The title of this thread basically proves it. No one can guarantee anything, INCLUDING the fact the sun will even rise tomorrow. Rand Paul is at BEST an extreme longshot to get the nomination. Anyone with an ounce of sense would know that. Doesn't stop me from supporting him, or donating to him or writing him in on election day. Just means I am intelligent enough and wise enough to see things clearly and I understand, as it sits now Rand Paul has a less than 5% chance of getting the nomination.

Ron Paul could raise more money in a SINGLE money bomb then Rand can get in a single quarter! Technically, using the strategy that is guaranteed to help get Rand into the white house, Ron won Iowa. Ron Paul won the national CPAC 2 years in a row. Every reason people are claiming Rand will win, Ron has accomplished and THEN some. Ron Paul stayed in when everyone was so sure there was going to be a brokered convention!

Guess what? No Ron Paul nominee. No Ron Paul POTUS.

Rand is in a far worse position than his father and yet it is guaranteed by this thread he is going to win.

Give me a break.

I still look forward to 2020, hopefully the ophthalmologist runs then and uses the 2020 to his advantage. Only time will tell. Im hopeful the country has gone to shit enough by then, that MAYBE these sheep will wake up and elect a Paul.

The Rand forum is for supporters of Rand who are working to get him elected to POTUS in 2016. You were already told not to keep posting in here, yet you do so anyway. Maybe you can come back in 2020 to help him get reelected, but you won't be able to stay in here if you keep actively working against the purpose of this forum.

 

[dude58677]

The thing is, it doesn't matter what you do. Ron Paul had plenty of endorsements. If the system doesn't like you, which it's clear they don't like Rand, then you're not going to win, no matter how fired-up you get. I think it's best to take the path to realism.