RP Winning 5 States, TAMPA "INEVITABLE" <--- FOX NEWS

[puppetmaster]

I tally the number (an estimate).
Romney 840 need 32% of the remaining delegates from uncommitted and remaining primaries.
Paul 106 need 109% (impossible) of same as above

The percentage for Paul maybe better once Iowa, Maine, and Washington results come in but essentially base on my understanding it is impossible for him to win now.

Nothing is impossible when it comes to Freedom, Grassroots, and Ron Paul.

 

[sailingaway]

I tally the number (an estimate).
Romney 840 need 32% of the remaining delegates from uncommitted and remaining primaries.
Paul 106 need 109% (impossible) of same as above

The percentage for Paul maybe better once Iowa, Maine, and Washington results come in but essentially base on my understanding it is impossible for him to win now.

He is going to 'undo' some of the already 'assigned' numbers. For example those estimated in MN are going to be wrong, Ron is going to get the lion's share. Same in other places.

However, you are only speaking about first ballot. If Romney DOESN'T get the delegates to win on first ballot, it goes to SECOND ballot, and then the numbers change again.

So he has a chance as long as Romney can't win on first ballot.

Beyond that, he has a chance to become a substantial and non-ignorable faction in the party, for our candidates going forward and for the principles we stand for, regardless.

 

[sailingaway]

The thing is most party regulars will respond with something along the lines of 'How can he be electable if he keeps losing?' (I know he won the Virgin Islands but I don't think a lot of people do).

So did Romney keep losing. He was under 50% most of the way. Ron picks up people from the other side of the aisle in the general.

 

[sailingaway]

Actually Paul did not win the Virgin Islands. There was no straw poll or beauty contest in the VI. Voters elected delegates only. Here is the official ballot - http://vigop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Official-Ballot-2012-Caucus.pdf

On the ballot Paul had 6 delegates, Romney had 3, Newt & Santorum each had 2, and 9 were uncommitted. Voters could vote for up to 6 delegates. Paul's six delegates received a total of 112 votes, Romney's 3 delegates received 103 votes. The actual "winner" was "Uncommitted" which received a total of 130 votes. The final results showed that the winners were Romney's 3 delegates, 1 of Paul's delegates and 5 of the uncommitted delegates. http://vigop.com/2012/03/vi-gop-2012-caucus-results-coming-soon/

that isn't true. they took down the straw poll but those of us watching that night saw that he won it. A few small blogs even reported it. Why would you want to suggest otherwise?

 

[sailingaway]

The platform means nothing. The '08 platform committee was co-chaired by Sen. Richard Burr. That platform had strong anti-bailout language. Burr voted for TARP.

The. Platform. Means. NOTHING.

Being able to change the platform means you are in a position of influence. This time we have people going to the committees.

 

[NIU Students for Liberty]

Being able to change the platform means you are in a position of influence. This time we have people going to the committees.

Regardless, do you think Romney would actually follow a platform dictated by Ron Paul? Why would he when he has already flip flopped on every word that he has uttered? Yes he may borrow some of that rhetoric during the election but I know you aren't naive enough to believe that his presidency and other Republicans would actually carry out that philiosophy.

 

[tbone717]

that isn't true. they took down the straw poll but those of us watching that night saw that he won it. A few small blogs even reported it. Why would you want to suggest otherwise?

Because VI does not have a straw poll. You can see the official ballot, there is no place on there for a presidential selection, and this is the same means that the VI has voted in previous elections. You can also view the rules of the VI caucus, which makes no mention of a straw poll. (link).

The results that a "few small blogs" reported were the total delegate votes (112 for Paul). Paul's site even erroneously reported this (source) as a caucus win.

If you look at the results from the VI voting you will see this:

Delegates (as voted, the hard count- Romney 3, Uncommitted 2, Paul 1)
1. April Newland: 42 (28 STX, 14 STT) Romney.
2. Gwendolyn Brady: 37 (34 STX, 3 STT) Uncommitted.
3. Warren Bruce Cole: 31 (28 STX, 3 STT) Uncommitted (Pledged to Romney after the vote totals).
4. John A. Clendenin: 32 (26 STX, 6 STT) Romney.
5. Robert Max Schanfarber: 29 (11 STX, 18 STT) Paul.
6. Luis R. Martinez: 30 (27 STX, 3 STT) Romney.
Alternate Delegates
1. Joshua A. Schanfarber: 21 (5 STX, 16 STT) Paul.
2. Humberto O'Neal: 20 (19 STX, 1 STT) Uncommitted.
3. Geoffrey Wolfe: 18 (5 STX, 13 STT) Paul.
4. George Blackhall: 16 (8, STX, 8 STT) Uncommitted.
5. Dwain E. Ford: 16 (13 STX, 3 STT) Gingrich.
6. Tie Breaker required as Alternate Delegate #6 TBD.
Vince Danet: 15 (10 STX, 5 STT) Santorum.
Roseann Wells: 15 (2 STX, 13 STT) Paul.
Michael Wilson: 15 (2 STX, 13 STT) Paul.
Eddie Jane Simmons: 14 (1 STX, 13 STT) Paul.
Kimberly Lynn Jones: 12 (11 STX, 1 STT) Uncommitted.
DeWayne Bridges: 8 (3 STX, 5 STT) Santorum.
James Bland: 4 (4 STX, 0 STT) Uncommitted.
Dennis Best: 4 (1 STX, 3 STT) Uncommitted.
Patrick Witcher: 4 (0 STX, 4 STT) Uncommitted.
Steve Mitchum: 4 (0 STX, 4 STT) Uncommitted.
Steven Hardy: 3 (0 STX, 3 STT) Gingrich.

When you add the total of Paul's 6 delegate candidates (R. Schanfarber, J Schanfarber, Wolfe, Wells, Wilson, Simmons) you get 112, the total that was being reported erroneously as a caucus victory.

 

[kathy88]

I think certain people on this forum should be limited to... say 10 threads per day that they are allowed to shit in, and/or call us delusional.... stuff like that.

 

[rockerrockstar]

What I wonder is if Romney does not poll well against Obama all the way up to the convention that the GOP may decide to go with Ron since he may actually win versus Romney who probably will lose. Just saying Ron has a better chance of beating Obama.

 

[tbone717]

I think certain people on this forum should be limited to... say 10 threads per day that they are allowed to shit in, and/or call us delusional.... stuff like that.

Would you prefer to believe lies? Like "Ron Paul wins the youth vote", when the polls show that he loses it more than he wins it? Or Paul won the VI straw poll, when there was no straw poll?

 

[kathy88]

I would prefer that every time a positive thread is going that you wouldn't come in and derail it. Hope keeps people going. We know the deal. We just don't need you reminding us 200 times a day. It's like you scour the board looking to post negativity. Really. Since Santorum dropped out and you can't try to push people to vote for him for your "strategy" you've become a real bummer.

 

[idiom]

Its going be one on one for Texas and California. Plenty of fireworks left.

 

[tbone717]

Actually that was parocks strategy suggestion IIRC. It did make strategic sense at the time for the anti Romney vote to combine their vote for one candidate, but it was an impractical idea as it could never be communicated to a large mass of voters

 

[WesSeid]

What I wonder is if Romney does not poll well against Obama all the way up to the convention that the GOP may decide to go with Ron since he may actually win versus Romney who probably will lose. Just saying Ron has a better chance of beating Obama.

The GOP would rather have four more years of Obama than elect an honest man to be President.

 

[kathy88]

Actually that was parocks strategy suggestion IIRC. It did make strategic sense at the time for the anti Romney vote to combine their vote for one candidate, but it was an impractical idea as it could never be communicated to a large mass of voters

Well my apologies for that, then. But negativity is so pervasive. We need to be as positive as we can until this is over, one way or the other. And by over I mean until Tampa. ANYTHING can happen. If Romney's wife continues to alienate women the way she has been there could be serious poll numbers dropping. That bitch is delusional. I didn't mean to single you out. I'm still pissed about yesterday.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

We'll win California and Texas. Now FUCK OFF.

You remind me of this guy somehow:

 

[tbone717]

Well my apologies for that, then. But negativity is so pervasive. We need to be as positive as we can until this is over, one way or the other. And by over I mean until Tampa. ANYTHING can happen. If Romney's wife continues to alienate women the way she has been there could be serious poll numbers dropping. That bitch is delusional. I didn't mean to single you out. I'm still pissed about yesterday.

No problem, I'm upset as well. The only bright spot from yesterday was that Pinto won my precinct.

 

[sailingaway]

Would you prefer to believe lies? Like "Ron Paul wins the youth vote", when the polls show that he loses it more than he wins it? Or Paul won the VI straw poll, when there was no straw poll?

the GOP there had the preference poll results on its official web page before it deleted them. There is a thread here that may contain screen shots if you care to look for it.

And I agree with Kathy, it is not your job to insist everyone share your bad view of how things are going. You clearly have an agenda in downplaying any win Ron gets, I mean what reasonable person would bother marshalling arguments against Ron winning the Virgin Islands? Why would you want to? Your agenda increasingly seems contrary to the goal of this forum to support Ron's run.

 

[kathy88]

No problem, I'm upset as well. The only bright spot from yesterday was that Pinto won my precinct.

And two of our SK's made delegate

 

[opinionatedfool]

I did. It got bumped to HT

Lol, maybe that's because you are Mr. Negative?