Washington delegate discussion

[literatim]

Perfect! Now we have like 10 more delegates, instead of having the huge momentum that a win could have brought.

I hope those delegates can get us the airtime that a first place could have given, including to revert the idea that Ron Paul can't win. Or that has dropped out.

Great strategy! I can see it working now /end sarcasm

Too bad they aren't actually reporting the caucus straw polls, but are actually reporting primary absentee ballots that are currently being counted.

 

[Revolution9]

It was not incompetence from the official campaign, don't be an ass. This was a played moved to make sure we get as many delegates to the county convention as possible.

A consistent voice of common sense and an RP avatar that seems to espouse such..heh

Best
Randy

 

[coboman]

You gotta be kidding me. The coverage would have been:
"Hey, you know that guy who was running for president of the moon?"
"Oh, you must mean that kook Ron Paul <giggle>"

Instead the coverage for Ron Paul was... nothing.

Even people on this forum are asking if he is still in the race.

One win is what everybody has been asking from the beginning. The first of many. Just one, damn it! Something to prove ourselves and others that he CAN win.

More like he could have won. Because now it is pretty much over.

 

[Revolution9]

A WIN, a WIN, A WIN! We NEED A DAMN WIN!!!

Then the Stanley Cup will be ours and we can go get drunk after we splooge all over the furniture.

What is your goal..

Randy

 

[Avalon]

Well this IS that win. We are currently leading WA in delegates and I hope the campaign sends out an email to everyone. But even if they don't, we need to spread that message everywhere we can. We dominated the caucuses! We may end up giving some national delegates to Huckster at the state convention but it's quite evident McCain will get NONE.

 

[Rusty John]

Instead the coverage for Ron Paul was... nothing.

Even people on this forum are asking if he is still in the race.

One win is what everybody has been asking from the beginning. The first of many. Just one, damn it! Something to prove ourselves and others that he CAN win.

More like he could have won. Because now it is pretty much over.

Washington state was the place too- this state is perfect for him to win- which he did, but now we're getting zero press because of this uncommitted crap. And why RP chose to send out that e-mail the day before three caucuses/primaries is beyond me.

 

[DontFret]

You guys who are questioning the official campaign motives or asking for all kinds of details as evidence in WA aren't helping any, in my opinion.

If you are truly a Ron Paul supporter (because at least one in this thread looks very suspect) then please think carefully about this before posting any more on this particular subject...

The MSM will NEVER broadcast results that benefit Ron Paul in a positive light. Repeat after me... NEVER. This will not be about MSM provided momentum, and there is no other momentum to be had amongst the general public. The momentum to be had is amongst Ron Paul supporters who understand the scope and nature of the MSM blackout. It is real, it is no accident, and it is NOT going to change.

The strategy of gaining delegates at all costs is very wise, even if some people think it may be squandering momentum that could otherwise be gained. There is no momentum to be had by anything reported by the MSM. They will twist it or ignore it to make it inconsequential if they even bother to mention it. They will also never correlate one candidate, particularly Dr. Paul with having gained more in a state delegate-wise than he did in terms of popular vote.

This is about delegates and nothing else now. Forget the momentum with the people who get their news and thoughts from the MSM. They will never hear about anything positive related to the Ron Paul campaign. And perhaps more importantly, if the other campaigns truly believe that Paul is garnering enough prospective delegate support under the radar then they will likely circle the wagons and pull another fast one prior to the convention.

Does Paul actually have enough delegates for them to be worried? The likely answer is no. Is it possible by the end of the primary process? Maybe, but only in the event that McCain doesn't get the necessary count to put him automatically over the top.

No one knows exactly how many delegates will end up voting for any particular candidate, but that will only matter if McWar doesn't get the critical number.

I would argue that all RP delegate candidates should represent themselves as uncommitted at this point. Momentum cannot be had through the MSM, and the uncommited angle is the best way to keep the other megalomaniacs guessing about just what the convention will hold.

Paul could end up as a player there, just as he could end up as nothing but an observer whose speech (assuming they allow him one) isn't even covered by the MSM... This is about delegates now, and nothing else!

 

[ArrestPoliticians]

Yes, yes- this was listed on another thread but I want to explain what the other poster meant.

A lot of those uncommitted delegates are Ron Paul supporters. The reason why is we were told by RP state headquarters NOT to identify ourselves as Ron Paul supporters when we first caucused.

However, the way the state GOP ran this thing is when everyone first signed in at their precinct they asked us to list out name, address, contact info and to put our presidential preference on the sign in sheet. I put Ron Paul- but was hesitant to. I spoke to other people in my precinct who were Ron Paul delegates who put down uncommitted as they were told by state headquarters.

In my precinct we had 7 people show up. Two were Ron Paul supporters, two were Huckabee supporters, two were McCain supporters and one was a Romney supporter. We elected delegates- a Huckabee supporter was one and I was another.

In other precincts several Ron Paul supporters were nominated as delegates. They thought that after the delegates were chosen they would ask us who we supported. Instead, after we picked delegates, the PCOs wrote down our presidential preference from the sign-in sheet.

As a result, there are a significant amount of the 10 or 11% showing "undecided" who are Paul supporters. The thought process on this by the campaign was we'd sneak more delegates under the radar, but right now, in my opinion, we don't need more delegates under the radar, we need to win a friggn' state so we get press coverage.

sounds like you've got some double agents meddling in the campaign. What a bad idea.

 

[Avalon]

You guys who are questioning the official campaign motives or asking for all kinds of details as evidence in WA aren't helping any, in my opinion.

If you are truly a Ron Paul supporter (because at least one in this thread looks very suspect) then please think carefully about this before posting any more on this particular subject...

The MSM will NEVER broadcast results that benefit Ron Paul in a positive light. Repeat after me... NEVER. This will not be about MSM provided momentum, and there is no other momentum to be had amongst the general public. The momentum to be had is amongst Ron Paul supporters who understand the scope and nature of the MSM blackout. It is real, it is no accident, and it is NOT going to change.

The strategy of gaining delegates at all costs is very wise, even if some people think it may be squandering momentum that could otherwise be gained. There is no momentum to be had by anything reported by the MSM. They will twist it or ignore it to make it inconsequential if they even bother to mention it. They will also never correlate one candidate, particularly Dr. Paul with having gained more in a state delegate-wise than he did in terms of popular vote.

This is about delegates and nothing else now. Forget the momentum with the people who get their news and thoughts from the MSM. They will never hear about anything positive related to the Ron Paul campaign. And perhaps more importantly, if the other campaigns truly believe that Paul is garnering enough prospective delegate support under the radar then they will likely circle the wagons and pull another fast one prior to the convention.

Does Paul actually have enough delegates for them to be worried? The likely answer is no. Is it possible by the end of the primary process? Maybe, but only in the event that McCain doesn't get the necessary count to put him automatically over the top.

No one knows exactly how many delegates will end up voting for any particular candidate, but that will only matter if McWar doesn't get the critical number.

I would argue that all RP delegate candidates should represent themselves as uncommitted at this point. Momentum cannot be had through the MSM, and the uncommited angle is the best way to keep the other megalomaniacs guessing about just what the convention will hold.

Paul could end up as a player there, just as he could end up as nothing but an observer whose speech (assuming they allow him one) isn't even covered by the MSM... This is about delegates now, and nothing else!

EXACTLY! Finally someone else who gets it!

 

[pacelli]

As a result, there are a significant amount of the 10 or 11% showing "undecided" who are Paul supporters. The thought process on this by the campaign was we'd sneak more delegates under the radar, but right now, in my opinion, we don't need more delegates under the radar, we need to win a friggn' state so we get press coverage.

Thank you for the info - pretty interesting strategy. But I agree, we could have used a first place finish. I guess the campaign has enough cash.

 

[fortilite]

So we got... 31%?

LOL

 

[coboman]

The MSM will NEVER broadcast results that benefit Ron Paul in a positive light. Repeat after me... NEVER. This will not be about MSM provided momentum, and there is no other momentum to be had amongst the general public. The momentum to be had is amongst Ron Paul supporters who understand the scope and nature of the MSM blackout. It is real, it is no accident, and it is NOT going to change.

I don't give a fuck about MSM. I care about US!

About the morale reaching new lows after three more losses, and having Ron Paul more worried about his seat in congress than the presidency.

The donations came to a new low today, and tomorrow is going to be the lowest on record.

THAT could have changed with a win. Now most independents (myself included) are starting to consider other options to prevent McCain from reaching the White House.

 

[Avalon]

I don't give a fuck about MSM. I care about US!

About the morale reaching new lows after three more losses, and having Ron Paul more worried about his seat in congress than the presidency.

The donations came to a new low today, and tomorrow is going to be the lowest on record.

THAT could have changed with a win. Now most independents (myself included) are starting to consider other options to prevent McCain from reaching the White House.

Obama?

 

[Rusty John]

Obama?

The way I see it, the economy is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. If McCain is the nominee better to vote for Obama- have him and the Dems in congress take the blame for everything so we can reclaim the party and the house/senate in 2010 with the Paul brigades.

 

[coboman]

Obama?

Yes.

The man is a great debater. He has a great organization, and has been able to capitalize every positive thing that has happened to his campaign.
Much more than I can say of Ron Paul.

He opposed the war, and has promised to withdraw the troops from Iraq since day one of his administration, and take less than 18 months to bring everyone home.
War is my main concern.

But above all, he seems able to get things done. He has taste. His ads, his website, his carefully chosen words, and his speeches, are top notch.
Ron Paul has proven time after time a complete lack of taste. His ads are tacky, his speeches are loud, and unnecessarily complex. His debating skills are lacking.

There is much more to a true leader than good ideas. The ability to materialize those ideas is what really counts.

And in that arena, Obama beats Ron Paul hand over fist.

 

[ValidusCustodiae]

Yes.

The man is a great debater. He has a great organization, and has been able to capitalize every positive thing that has happened to his campaign.
Much more than I can say of Ron Paul.

He opposed the war, and has promised to withdraw the troops from Iraq since day one of his administration, and take less than 18 months to bring everyone home.
War is my main concern.

But above all, he seems able to get things done. He has taste. His ads, his website, his carefully chosen words, and his speeches, are top notch.
Ron Paul has proven time after time a complete lack of taste. His ads are tacky, his speeches are loud, and unnecessarily complex. His debating skills are lacking.

There is much more to a true leader than good ideas. The ability to materialize those ideas is what really counts.

And in that arena, Obama beats Ron Paul hand over fist.

O"bomb"a wants to bomb Iran. He wants nationalized medicine. Tighter gun restrictions. More foreign aid, etc. etc. etc. If you think this man is some sort of viable alternative, you have been bamboozled. The only thing Barack Obama would change is the color of the man in the White House who is ignoring the Constitution. This is especially disappointing given Obama's career as a professor of Constitutional law. He knows better.

 

[Dr.3D]

Perfect! Now we have like 10 more delegates, instead of having the huge momentum that a win could have brought.

I hope those delegates can get us the airtime that a first place could have given, including to revert the idea that Ron Paul can't win. Or that has dropped out.

Great strategy! I can see it working now /end sarcasm

It wouldn't matter if Ron Paul landed on the front lawn of the White House in a flying saucer, he would still get no 'air time'.

 

[coboman]

O"bomb"a wants to bomb Iran.

FALSE. He wants to solve the differences with diplomacy.

would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?" Obama answered, "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.

He wants nationalized medicine. Tighter gun restrictions.

So do I. Universal health care is something that every industrialized nation has, at a much lower cost that the health care in USA (Check out the Sicko documentary).
And restricting the use of guns to competent adults is fine with me.

Obama may not be the best choice, but right now, it is the best viable choice.
And, in my opinion, he is not "the lesser of two evils".

 

[TruthAtLast]

i have no doubt that there is some sweeping covert strategy to steal delegates. My issue is more with HQ. There doesn't seem to be much leadership or communication with the supporters (you know, the ones that have given him millions of dollars).

Yes, he says he will continue the campaign but it sounded like he was giving up when he said "with Romney gone there is nearly a 0% chance of a national convention". Even if he believed that, why would he send us this right before some of these primaries? Surely he is in the loop of this covert strategy to gain delegates right? Surely HE isn't getting his facts from the media.

I just don't get it. Is it because he wanted us to rally behind his Congressional bid and throw money his way (which we did)? The media had a field day with his email which hurt a campaign whose morale is already hanging by a thread in some cases.

I support Ron Paul and his message of truth, but I'm very disappointed with the campaign's management and strategy. I've invested thousands of dollars and I'm not sure if that money was well spent. Maybe he should have just rented 50 blimps.

At this point, is he trying to win or is he just trying to fight the good fight and spread the message? I ask because some supporters are still giving everything they have and trying to win this thing for him. Yes it is a long shot and it would have to go to a brokered convention, and even then, we'd have to have enough "hidden" delegates that would be uncommitted in the second round that we could pull off a coup. But really, wasn't that the plan from the beginning anyway? So what has changed?

 

[tropicangela]

FALSE. He wants to solve the differences with diplomacy.

So do I. Universal health care is something that every industrialized nation has, at a much lower cost that the health care in USA (Check out the Sicko documentary).
And restricting the use of guns to competent adults is fine with me.

Obama may not be the best choice, but right now, it is the best viable choice.
And, in my opinion, he is not "the lesser of two evils".

Sicko was bias and slanted. Canadians come to our country to have babies because there is no room in their maternity wards... women CANNOT wait for a bed when they give birth in a hospital, especially when they are high risk. Some people are happy with socialized medicine, NOT everyone. There are many problems associated with it... it's not SUNSHINE. Michael Moore forgot to tell you that France has such great maternity incentives like government paid maternity leave, because their population is at risk and they are trying to increase it.

Obama wants to bomb... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIum0o-_LZk